^i^nUl  20  1922 


THE   KINGDOM   OF   GO 


OR, 


CffEISrS  TEACHING  ACGOBDINa  TO  THE 
SYNOPTICAL  GOSPELS. 


BY 


y 


ALEXANDER  BALMAIN  BEUCE,  D.D 

PROFESSOR  OF 

NKW    TESTAMENT    EXEGESIS    IN    THE    FREE    CHURCH    COLLEGE,    GLASGOW  ; 

AUTHOR   OF 

"the   TRAINING    OF   THE   TWELVE,"    "THE   HUMILIATION   OF   CHRIST," 

ETC.    ETC. 


SCRIBNER     &     WELFORD, 
*743   AND   745   BROADWAY, 
NEW    YORK. 
1889. 


OLD  STUDENTS 

OF 

GLASGOW    FREE    CHURCH    COLLEGE 

AS 

A   MEMORIAL   OF    HOURS   SPENT 

IN 

THE   STUDY    OF   THE   WORDS    OF    CHRIST 

THIS    BOOK 

IS   RESPECTFULLY   DEDICATED 

BY 

THE  AUTHOR. 


PREFACE. 


The  first  ten  of  the  fifteen  chapters  contained  in  this 
volume  appeared  a  few  years  ago  in  the  pages  of  the 
Monthly  Inteiyrder.  They  have  been  carefully  revised 
and  brought  down  to  date.  The  remaining  five  chapters, 
with  the  Introduction,  appear  here  for  the  first  time. 

This  book  is  a  first  instalment  of  a  projected  work 
on  the  leading  types  of  doctrine  in  the  New  Testament 
concerning  the  Good  that  came  to  the  world  through 
Jesus  Christ,  whereof  the  plan  is  briefly  outlined  in 
the  last  section  of  the  Tntrod^cction.. 

A.  B.  BRUCE. 

Glasgow,  September  1889. 


CONTENTS. 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION. 

SECTION 

I.  The  sources, 

II.  Luke's  variations,  ...... 

HI.  The  motives  of  Luke's  variations,    . 
IV.  The  synoptical  type  of  doctrine. 


PAOK 
1 

14 

28 
38 


CHAPTER  I. 

chkist's  idea  or  the  kingdom. 

Two  opposed  tendencies, 

Senses  of  the  expression  :   The  Kingdom  of  God,     . 

Idea  suggested  by  prophecy, 

The  mysteries  of  the  kingdom,       .... 
Words  of  grace,      .         . 

Effect  of  Christ's  preaching, 

To  whom  Christ  preached,     ..... 
Significance  of  Christ's  attitude  towards  social  abjects, 
Sayings  involving  universalism,     .... 
Sayings  of  apparently  contrary  import,  . 
Spirituality  of  the  kingdom  :  the  kingdom  of  Heaven, 
The  kingdom  in  outline,         ..... 


43 

46 
47 
49 
50 
51 
53 
54 
55 
56 
58 
59 


CHAPTER  II. 
Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law. 


Reticence  of  Christ, 

Think  not  I  came  to  destroy, 

Destroying  by  fulfilling, 

Scale  of  moral  worth,    . 

Straws  showing  the  stream  of  tendency. 


63 

64 
65 
66 
68 


X  CONTENTS. 

PA(iK 

Silence  concerning  circumcision,     .......  68 

The  things  that  defile, 69 

The  statute  of  divorce,   .........  71 

The  Sabbath, 72 

Made  for  man,        ..........  74 

Summary, 79 

The  least  in  the  kingdom  greater  than  John, 80 

John's  doubt  of  Christ, 82 

Christ's  method  of  working, 83 

CHAPTER  III. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE. 

Repent  and  believe, 

Repentance  as  conceived  by  Christ  and  the  Baptist, 

Repentance  no  arbitrary  requirement,    . 

Disciples  called  on  to  repent, 

The  cities  of  the  plain,  .... 

Faith  the  chief  condition  of  admission,  . 

Signifies  a  new  dejDarture, 

Christian  universalism,  .... 

Typical  narratives  showing  Christ's  estimate  of  faith, 

The  woman  who  was  a  sinner. 

The  psychology  of  faith, 

The  Roman  centurion,   .         .         -         . 

The  Syro-Phcenician  Woman, 

"  Faith  Alone," 


8.0 

86 

89 

90 

93 

94 

95 

96 

97 

97 

100 

101 

103 

107 


CHAPTER  IV. 


CHRIST  S  DOCTRINE  OF  GOD. 

The  divine  Father,         ..... 
The  new  element  in  Christ's  idea,  . 
God's  Fatherhood  in  relation  to  men  in  general, 
The  providential  aspect,          .... 
The  gracious  aspect :  parables  in  Luke  xv. ,    . 
Universalism  involved,  ..... 


God's  Fatherhood  in  relation  to  disciples. 
The  providential  aspect,         .... 

Value  of  Christ's  doctrine  on. 

Parables  of  The  Selfish  Neighbour  and  The  Unjust  Judge, 

The  gracious  aspect,       ...... 

Parable  of  The  Blade,  the  Ear,  and  the  Full  Corn, 
The  Fatherhood  of  God  still  imperfectly  comprehended. 


109 
110 
111 
111 
112 
114 
114 
115 
119 
120 
122 
124 
127 


CONTENTS. 


XI 


CHAPTER  V. 


CHEIST  S  DOCTRINE  OF  MAN. 

PAGE 

The  doctrines  of  God  and  of  man  ever  kindred,     ....  128 
Significance   of    Christ's    attitude    towards    the    poor    and    the 

depraved, 129 

Immortality, 131 

Social  salvation,  ..........  132 

Ideal  and  reality, 133 

Human  depravity  in  Christ's  teaching  and  in  scholastic  theology,  134 

The  "Lost," 136 

Zacchseus, 137 

The  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel, 138 

True  and  false  holiness,        .         .         .         .         .         .         .         .  140 

Why  Christ  addressed  Himself  to  the  humbler  classes,           .         .  142 

The  Two  Dehtors, 143 

7%e  i/os^  ;S'/«ee/>  and  the  "  Lapsed  Masses," 143 

The  people  of  the  land, 145 


CHAPTER  VI. 


THE  RELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES  AND  FUNCTIONS. 


Had  Jesus  a  Messianic  idea  ? 

His  idea  a  transformed  one, 

Its  nature,   .... 

He  claimed  to  be  this  Messiah, 

The  proof,    . 

Genesis  of  Christ's  Messianic  consciousness,  . 

Did  Jesus  ever  doubt  His  Messiahship  ? 

Aids  to  faith  in  His  Messianic  vocation, 

His  Messianic  consciousness  free  from  ambition, 


148 
149 
150 
153 
153 
158 
161 
162 
164 


CHAPTER  VII. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD. 


Was  the  Son  of  Man  a  current  Messianic  title  ? 

Its  use  in  the  Book  of  Enoch, 

Old  Testament  source  of  the  title, 

Its  use  in  the  Gospels, 

The  texts  classified. 

The  unprivileged  man, 


166 
167 
169 
171 
172 
172 


Xll 


CONTENTS. 


The  sympathetic  man,  ...... 

The  apocaly[)tic  aspect,         ...... 

Future  glory  and  present  humiliation, 

An  incognito, 

The  title  Son  of  God,  .      .  ,. n^ «■...  r.Tr.rr-mirtf- — >-       ,;■„„ 

The  official  sense,  ....... 

The  ethical  sense,  ....... 

The  filial  consciousness  of  Jesus  analysed,     .. 

The  metaphysical  sense,        ...... 

The  two  titles  in  relation  to  the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom, 


PAGE 

173 

174 
175 
177 

178 
179 
180 
184 
186 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


THE  EIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM— NEGATIVE  ASPECT. 

Criticism  an  inevitable  task  for  the  Christ, 

The  task  faithfully  performed, 

Yet  temperately. 

And  with  discrimination, 

Origin  of  Eabbinism,    . 

The  process  of  degeneracy, 

Examples  of  fencing  the  law. 

Multiplication  of  rules, 

Arts  of  evasion. 

The  Sabbath  laws  :  Erubin, 

Neglect  of  the  great  commandments, 

Externalism,         .... 

Spiritual  vices  of  Rabbinism, 

Pharisaic  righteousness  outside  the  kingdom, 

The  strait  gate  and  the  narrow  way,     . 


187 
188 
189 
190 
191 
192 
193 
194 
196 
197 
198 
199 
200 
203 
205 


CHAPTER  IX, 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM— POSITIVE  ASPECT 

The  righteousness  of  God  :  its  contents, 

Right  thoughts  of  God, 

The  rabbinical  God, 

Perfect  as  the  Father  in  heaven,  , 

Filial  righteousness  :  characteristics. 

Righteousness  of  discipleship, 

Imitation  of  Christ, 

Righteousness  of  citizenshi]), 

Parables  of  The  Treasure  and  The  Pearl, 

The  three  aspirants,      .... 


207 
208 
209 
211 
213 
217 
219 
221 
222 
222 


CONTENTS. 


xm 


PAGE 

Perfection, 223 

Parable  of  Extra  Service, 225 

Parable  of  The  Labourers  in  the  Vineyard, 226 

General  reflections, 226 


CHAPTER  X. 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE. 


The  doctrine  of  the  cross,     . 

First  lesson  :  for  righteousness'  sake. 

Second  lesson  :  for  the  unrighteous, 

A  ransom  for  the  many, 

The  temple-tax, 

Third  lesson  :  dies  in  love  to  men 

Mary  of  Bethany, 

The  wastefulness  of  love, 

Fourth  lesson  :  for  the  remission  of  sins 

The  new  covenant. 

The  new  era, 

Characteristics,     . 

The  Holy  Supper, 


231 
231 
235 
236 
239 
243 
244 
245 
246 
247 
249 
250 
251 


CHAPTER  XL 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH. 


The  kingdom  of  God  an  ideal  craving  embodiment, 
The  choice  of  the  twelve,      .... 

''My  Church," 

Election,  how  to  be  understood,   . 

The  sacraments  :  Baptism, 

The  Trinitarian  formula,      .... 

The  Holy  Spirit  in  Christ's  teaching,   . 

The  nature  of  the  Church,    .... 

On  this  rock  :  Peter,    ..... 

The  Church  Christian,  .... 

The  Church  and  the  kingdom, 

The  righteousness  of  the  kingdom  realized  therein. 

Training  of  the  apostles,      .... 

Christ's  promise  and  prophecy  conditional, 

Is  the  Church  a  failure  ?       .         .         .         . 


252 
253 
254 
256 
257 
258 
259 
260 
261 
262 
264 
266 
268 
271 
271 


XIV 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


THE  PA.ROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA. 


Conflicting  texts,  .... 

A  lengthened  history  anticipated  by  Christ, 

Parables  of  Growth, 

A  delayed  Parousia,    . 

Exhortations  to  Watch, 

Parable  of  The  Upper  Servant, 

A  Gentile  day  of  grace, 

The  times  of  the  Gentiles,    . 

The  other  class  of  texts, 

The  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man, 

Three  kinds  of  coming, 

The  eschatological  discourse, 

Of  that  day  knoweth  no  one. 

Variations  in  synoptical  reports, 


CHAPTER  XIII. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE. 


Chequered  character  of  the  history, 
Optimistic  parables  :  Mustard  Seed  and  Leaven, 
The  reverse  side  :  parable  of  The  Soioer, 
Parable  of  The  Tares  and  The  Drag  Net, 
Parable  of  The  Children  in  the  Market-place, 
Parable  of  The  Great  Supper, 
Rejection  of  the  Jews  :  relative  parables, 
Christ's  predictions  of  His  resurrection, 
Their  meaning,     ..... 
"  Destroy  this  temple," 
Import  of  the  saying, 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


The  ideal  will  be  realized,     . 
Purity  by  separation,  . 
Three  judgment  programmes, 
.Judgment  of  Christendom,  . 
Judgment  of  antichristcndom, 
lilasj)liemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost, 


CONTENTS. 


XV 


Judgment  of  heathendom,    . 

This  judgment  purely  ethical. 

"  Eternal "  punishment, 

Eternal  sin,  ..... 

The  everlasting  fire  not  prepared  for  man, 

Christ's  doctrine  of  election, 

Rewards  and  punishments,   . 

Judgment  according  to  natural  law, 

Pictorial  representations  of  eternal  statss, 

The  true  object  of  dread. 


PAGE 

315 
317 
318 
319 
321 
322 
323 
325 
326 
327 


CHAPTER  XV. 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST. 


"Back  to  Christ,"       .         .         .         . 

The  Christian  revival, 

Gospellers,  ...... 

The  Shorter  Catechism, 

A  Christian  primer,      .... 

Church  creeds  :  what  to  do  with  them, 
Reunion,      ...... 

Xew  apologetic,  ..... 

Can  we  know  Christ  ?  . 


328 
331 
331 
333 
334 
335 
337 
339 
340 


Index, 


342 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTIOK 


SECTION  I. THE    SOURCES. 

The  first  three  Gospels,  from  their  homogeneous  character 
called  synoptical,  differ  widely  from  the  fourth ;  as  in 
other  respects,  so  also  and  very  specially,  in  the  account 
which  they  give  of  our  Lord's  teaching.  And  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that,  as  compared  with  the  fourth  Gospel, 
the  synoptical  Gospels  present  that  teaching  in  its  original 
form.  To  the  question,  What  did  Christ  really  teach  ? 
What  were  the  very  words  He  spoke  ?  the  answer  must 
be  sought  in  the  first  place  from  them.  Their  reports 
are  more  indisputably  apostolic  in  their  ultimate  source, 
and  to  all  appearance  much  less  influenced  by  reflection 
on  the  part  of  the  writers. 

But  the  question  may  be  raised,  even  in  reference  to 
the  Synoptists,  whether  they  can  be  regarded  as  giving  a 
perfectly  trustworthy  report  of  the  sayings  of  Jesus. 
Even  if  they  did  not,  their  report  of  these  sayings  would 
still  form  an  interesting  subject  of  study.  But  it  is 
obviously  important  to   know  how  far  the  best  sources 

A 


2  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

extant  are  reliable  ;  for  the  supreme  desire  of  all  Christians 
is  to  know  exactly  the  mind  of  the  Master. 

It  would  inspire  great  confidence  in  the  synoptical 
records  to  be  assured  that  they  were  compiled  by  certain 
of  the  men  who  "  had  been  with  Jesus."  These  men 
were  eye  and  ear  witnesses  of  Christ's  ministry ;  they 
knew  much  if  not  all  that  He  said  and  did,  and  they 
could  be  trusted  to  tell  honestly  and  with  substantial 
accuracy  what  they  knew. 

But  there  is  no  sufficient  evidence  that  any  one  of  the 
first  three  Gospels,  in  the  form  in  which  we  have  them, 
proceeded  from  the  hand  of  an  apostle.  The  most  that 
can  be  said  is,  that  their  reports  are  based  on  apostolic 
traditions,  preserved  either  orally  or  in  written  form. 
That  these  traditions,  originating  ultimately,  without 
doubt,  in  apostolic  preaching,  had,  before  our  Gospels 
were  written,  assumed  a  comparatively  stereotyped  form, 
is  apparent  from  the  extensive  resemblance  in  the  synop- 
tical accounts  both  in  substance  and  in  style. 

The  literary  relations  subsisting  between  these  Gospels 
are  such  as  to  make  it  probable,  if  not  certain,  that 
written  accounts  of  Christ's  words  and  deeds  were  pre- 
viously in  existence,  and  were  accessible  to  the  evan- 
gelists. From  the  preface  to  the  third  Gospel,  it  may  be 
inferred  that  there  had  been  considerable  activity  in  the 
production  of  such  accounts,  and  that  at  the  time  Luke 
wrote,  evangelic  collections  had  been  multiplied  to  such  an 
extent,  as  to  create  embarrassment  to  one  who  aimed  at 
giving  in  moderate  compass  a  full  narrative  of  the  more 
important  facts  in  the  life  of  Jesus. 

How  many  documents  Luke  used  in  the  compilation 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  3 

of  his  Gospel  cannot  be  known ;  but  two  sources,  at 
least,  of  outstanding  importance,  seem  to  have  been  at  his 
command,  and  to  have  supplied  the  main  body  of  his 
narrative — one  a  collection  of  sayings,  the  other  a  collec- 
tion of  narrations  similar  in  contents  to  the  second 
Gospel.  By  a  comparison  of  his  Gospel  with  the  other 
two,  the  inference  is  sucjejested  that  these  two  sources 
form  the  basis  of  all  three  synoptical  Gospels.  Whether 
we  should  identify  the  collection  of  narrations  with  the 
Gospel  of  Mark,  or  distinguish  it  therefrom  as  an  original 
Mark,  is  a  question  on  which  critics  are  divided  ;  but 
there  is  general  agreement  of  opinion  as  to  a  book  similar 
in  contents  to  Mark  forming  the  basis  of  the  common 
matter  of  the  first  three  Gospels  relating  to  the  deeds  of 
Jesus.  Whether,  again,  the  collection  of  sayings  used  by 
Luke  was  identical  in  contents  and  form  with  that  used 
by  the  first  evangelist,  is  a  matter  of  dispute ;  but  the 
extensive  similarity  between  the  first  and  third  Gospels  in 
their  respective  reports  of  Christ's  sayings,  leaves  little 
room  for  doubt  that  they  either  drew  from  one  source,  or 
from  sources  so  kindred  in  character  as  to  suggest  the 
conjecture  that  they  were  different  editions  of  the  same 
original  writing,  formed  under  different  influences. 

Eecent  criticism  recognises  in  these  two  sources  of  the 
synoptical  tradition  the  "Mark"  and  "Matthew"  of 
Papias,  —  the  former  either  to  be  identified  with  the 
canonical  Mark,  or  to  be  regarded  as  its  original,  and 
resting  on  the  preaching  of  Peter  as  its  ultimate  autho- 
rity; the  latter  written  by  the  Apostle  Matthew,  and 
forming  the  basis  of  the  canonical  Matthew.  Critics 
differ  in  their  interpretations  of  the  statement  of  Papias 


4  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

as  to  the  character  and  contents  of  the  two  sources,  some 
contending,  e.g.,  that  the  book  of  Logia,  said  to  have  been 
compiled  by  Matthew,  contained  notliing  but  sayings, 
while  others  arsjue  that  it  must  at  least  have  contained 
such  brief  narratives  as  were  necessary  to  make  the 
sayings  intelligible.  In  like  manner  it  is  disputed 
whether  Mark  consisted  only  of  narrations,  or  did  not  in 
its  oriejinal  form  contain  more  of  Christ's  words  than  are 
found  in  canonical  Mark,  e.g.  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.^ 
But  we  shall  not  err  greatly  if  we  say  that  the  two 
sources  differed  in  their  characteristics  at  least :  the  one 
being  predominantly  a  collection  of  sayings,  the  other 
chiefly  a  collection  of  narrations. 

What  mainly  interests  us  is  the  collection  of  Logia. 
"What  would  one  not  give  to  have  that  book  which  the 
Apostle  Matthew  wrote,  just  as  he  wrote  it !  But  the 
wish  is  idle ;  the  only  course  open  to  us  is  to  make 
ourselves  acquainted  with  its  contents  at  second-hand 
through  the  writings  of  the  two  evangelists,  who  have 
drawn  so  freely  from  it,  comparing  their  reports  one  with 
another  so  as  to  arrive  at  a  probable  conclusion  as  to  the 
original  form  of  the  sayings  recorded.  Attempts  have 
been  made  to  reconstruct  the  Logia  from  the  synoptical 
Gospels  ;^  but  such  attempts  can  be  little  more  than 
ingenious  conjectures.     We  cannot  at  this  date  resurrec- 

^  For  information  as  to  the  present  state  of  opinion  on  these 
questions,  readers  may  consult  the  Introductions  to  the  New  Testament 
by  Weiss  and  Holtzmann.  Weiss  thinks  the  main  source  of 
apostolic  tradition  was  the  Logia,  which  he  thinks  contained  many 
narrations  as  well  as  sayings  ;  Holtzmann  contends  for  an  Urmarkus 
as  the  main  source. 

2  Vide  Wendt's  Die  Lehre  Jesu,  Erster  Theil. 


CKITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  5 

tionize  a  lost  apostolic  document ;  all  that  is  possible  for 
us  is  to  make  ourselves  acquainted  with  extant  reports 
of  our  Lord's  words,  and  when  these  vary,  to  do  our 
best  to  determine  which  version  is  primary  and  which 
secondary. 

It  does  not  take  long  study  of  the  first  and  third 
Gospels  to  be  satisfied  that  if  their  authors  did  really 
use  a  common  source  in  reporting  the  words  of  Jesus, 
they  have  made  respectively  a  very  different  use  of  it. 
It  is,  indeed,  not  easy  to  understand  how  such  diversity 
could  exist  in  reports  based  on  the  same  document. 
Compare,  e.g.,  the  two  reports  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount.  How  strangely  divergent  on  the  whole,  and 
yet  too  similar  in  detail  to  admit  of  any  doubt  that  they 
are  different  versions  of  the  same  discourse.  One  of  two 
inferences  is  inevitable.  Either  one  of  the  reporters  (or 
possibly  both)  has  taken  considerable  liberties  with  the 
source,  or  the  source  existed  in  different  recensions, 
arising  in  different  circles,  and  under  different  influences. 
Either  supposition  is  possible ;  in  either  case  the  causes 
producing  the  diversity  might  be  to  a  large  extent  the 
same,  only  operating  in  different  ways.  In  case  the 
variations  were  due  to  the  evangelists,  we  should  have 
to  acknowledge  the  action  to  a  considerable  extent  of 
editorial  intention,  guided  by  possibly  ascertainable 
motives.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  variations  arose 
gradually  in  copies  of  the  Logia  in  the  possession  of 
different  persons,  before  they  came  under  the  eye  of  the 
evangelists,  then  we  may  conceive  them  cree]3ing  in 
insensibly  under  the  action  of  motives  of  which  the 
agents    in    producing    variation    were    hardly   conscious. 


b  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

The  latter  view  is  adopted  by  Weizsacker  in  his 
recently  published  work  on  The  Apostolic  Age.  His 
idea  of  the  matter  is  to  this  effect.  Collections  of 
Christ's  sayings  began  to  be  formed,  not  in  a  historical 
spirit,  but  simply  to  meet  the  practical  needs  of  disciples 
desirous  of  guidance  in  life.  It  was  recorded  that  on 
this  point  and  on  that  the  Master  spoke  thus  and  thus. 
Thus  groups  of  sayings  arose,  ever  increasing  as  time 
went  on.  But  the  purpose  aimed  at  not  being  the 
preparation  of  an  exact  historical  record,  but  the  instruc- 
tion of  the  faithful,  comments,  glosses,  explanations  grew 
up  simultaneously,  and  gradually  became  mixed  with  the 
words  of  the  Lord.  "  The  tradition  was  from  the  first 
not  mere  repetition,  but  was  bound  up  with  creative 
activity.  And,  as  was  natural,  this  activity  increased  in 
course  of  time.  Explanations  became  text.  The  single 
word  became  multiplied  with  the  multitude  of  its  appli- 
cations, or  the  words  were  connected  with  a  definite 
occasion  and  shaped  to  suit  it."  ^  In  this  way,  according 
to  this  writer,  many,  if  not  all,  the  variations  in  the 
reports  of  Christ's  words  are  to  be  accounted  for.  The 
conscious  editorial  activity  of  the  evangelists  he  seems 
inclined  to  reduce  to  a  minimum.  For  the  wide 
divergence  of  Luke's  report  of  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  from  that  of  Matthew,  he  is  not  disposed  to 
make  the  evangelist  responsible.  He  is  of  opinion 
that  Luke  found  the  Sermon  in  that  form  in  his 
source.  Even  the  Pauline,  universalistic,  element  in 
Luke's  Gospel  he  seems  willing  to  impute  not  to  Luke 
personally,  but  to  the  spirit  of  a  school  within  Palestine 
1  Das  Apostolische  Zeitalter^  S.  406. 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  7 

and  the  Jewish  Church,  originating  in  the  influence  of 
such  men  as  Stephen  and  Barnabas.  It  is  the  product 
and  witness  of  a  universalism  independent  of  Paul  within 
the  bosom  of  Hebrew  Christianity. 

This  new  view  is  certainly  a  great  improvement  on 
the  tendency-criticism  of  the  Tubingen  school,  headed 
by  Baur,  and  it  probably  contains  a  large  amount  of 
truth.  In  the  way  indicated  arose,  in  all  likelihood, 
variations  in  the  reports  of  Christ's  sayings  which  were  a 
datum  for  the  evangelists.  But  it  is  not  at  all  unlikely 
that  a  certain  number  of  the  existing  variations  are  due 
to  the  evangelists  themselves.  It  is  a  nowise  inad- 
missible supposition,  that  they  so  far  exercised  their 
discretion  in  the  use  of  their  sources  as  to  make  the 
material  serviceable  to  the  edification  of  those  for  whose 
special  benefit  they  wrote — acting  not  in  a  spirit  of 
licence,  but  with  the  freedom  of  men  who  believed  that 
it  was  more  important  that  their  readers  should  get  a 
true  impression  of  Christ  than  that  they  should  know 
the  ipsissi^na  vei^ha  of  His  sayings.  Thus  may  be 
accounted  for  alterations  of  words  and  phrases  occur- 
ring in  the  documents,  and  omissions  of  material  found 
there  not  deemed  suitable  for  his  purpose  by  the  com- 
piler. To  take  one  or  two  examples.  In  Luke's  version 
of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  there  are  two  verbal  varia- 
tions from  Matthew's  text :  the  substitution  of  %a/3t9 
(thanks,  grace)  for  ^l(j66^  in  the  saying  :  "  If  ye  love 
them  which  love  you,  what  reward  have  ye  ? "  ^  and  of 
olKTLpfjLove<;  (merciful)  for  jeXetoi  in  the  saying :  "  Be  ye 
therefore  perfect  even  as  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven 
1  Matt.  V.  46 ;  Luke  vi.  32. 


«  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

is  perfect."  ^  Assuming  that  the  sayings  stood  in  Luke's 
source  the  same  as  in  Matthew's,  we  can  easily  conceive 
him  making  these  changes  to  remove  an  element  of 
apparent  legalism  from  our  Lord's  utterances,  and  to 
bring  them  into  more  complete  harmony  with  evangelic, 
or  Pauline,  habits  of  thought  and  expression.  It  is 
noticeable  that  Luke  introduces  the  word  %api9  no  less 
than  three  times  in  the  passage  referred  to,  as  if  he  took 
pleasure  in  repeating  this  watchword  of  Pauline  theology. 
Of  course  these  changes  might  have  been  made  before 
Luke  wrote,  and  his  function  at  this  point  may  have 
been  merely  to  transcribe ;  but  the  other  alternative, 
that  he  made  the  alterations  for  the  reason  assigned,  is 
at  least  equally  probable. 

The  very  significant  and  characteristic  word  of  Jesus, 
''  I  came  not  to  call  the  righteous  but  sinners,"  ap>pears 
in  Luke's  Gospel  with  the  addition  "  unto  repentance."  ^ 
This  may  have  been  an  explanatory  gloss  that  had  crept 
into  the  text  used  by  the  evangelist,  but  it  may  quite  as 
well  have  been  a  change  made  by  him  to  render  the 
meaning  clear,  and  possibly  to  guard  against  the  mis- 
construction that  Christ  invited  sinners  to  the  Kingdom 
of  heaven  without  repentance. 

Not  only  alterations  but  omissions  might  be  made  out 
of  regard  to  edification.  The  story  of  the  Syro-Phenician 
woman  does  not  occur  in  Luke's  Gospel.  It  by  no 
means  follows  from  this  that  he  was  ignorant  of  it,  or 
that  it  was  missing  in  his  sources.  He  may  have  left  it 
out  to  avoid  the  risk  of  scandalizing  Gentile  readers  by 
the  appearance  therein  of  a  grudging  attitude  on  the 
1  Matt.  V.  48  ;  Luke  vi.  36.  2  Matt.  ix.  13  ;  Luke  v.  32. 


CEITICAL  INTKODUCTION.  9 

part  of  Jesus  towards  the  Pagan  world.  Other  omissions 
might  be  due  not  to  any  fear  of  wrong  impressions  being 
made,  but  simply  to  the  consideration  that  the  matters 
omitted  were  not  of  special  interest  or  concern  to  the 
first  readers.  Thus  may  be  accounted  for  the  absence 
from  Luke's  narrative  of  many  sections  relating  to 
Christ's  conflict  with  Pharisaism.  In  a  roundabout 
way,  a  regard  to  edification  might  explain  yet  another 
class  of  omissions  from  the  third  Gospel :  viz.  duplicate 
incidents,  such  as  the  second  feeding  of  the  multitude, 
and  the  second  storm  on  the  lake.  By  such  omissions 
we  may  conceive  Luke  making  room  for  important 
matter  peculiar  to  his  Gospel,  his  desire  being  to  intro- 
duce this  new  matter  without  unduly  extending  his 
narrative  ;  for  all  inspired  wTiters  seem  to  have  sensitively 
shrunk  from  being  tedious,  knowing  that  the  feeling  of 
weariness  is  fatal  to  edification. 

These  instances  may  suffice  to  show  how  an  evangelist 
might  w^ith  perfect  loyalty  and  a  good  conscience  exercise 
an  editorial  discretion  in  the  use  of  sources.  But  the 
point  of  importance  for  us  is  not  in  what  way  variations 
arose,  but  the  fact  that  they  exist,  and  the  question 
which  of  the  varying  reports  comes  nearer  to  the  original. 
This  resolves  itself  largely  into  a  question  as  to  the 
relative  merits  of  Matthew's  and  Luke's  reports  of  our 
Lord's  sayings  in  point  of  exactness.  The  question  is 
not  altogether  a  simple  one.  In  some  cases  the  evidence 
seems  to  be  in  favour  of  one  evangelist,  in  other  cases 
the  balance  inclines  towards  the  other.  Thus  one  can 
have  little  hesitation  in  pronouncing  in  favour  of 
Matthew's  form  of  the    saying,    "I    came    not    to    call 


10  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  righteous ; "  whereas  on  the  other  hand  in  the 
case  of  the  saying,  "  Seek  ye  first  the  kingdom  of  God  " 
(Matt.  vi.  33  ;  Luke  xii.  31),  the  critical  decision  gives  the 
preference  to  the  simple  brief  form  of  Luke,  "  But  rather 
seek  ye  the  kingdom  of  God,"  regarding  the  clause  "  and 
His  righteousness  "  in  Matthew  as  an  added  gloss,  designed 
to  bring  the  counsel  into  correspondence  with  the  drift 
of  the  whole  discourse,  which  is  to  contrast  the  righteous- 
ness of  God  with  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes.^  There 
are  cases  even  in  which  in  the  same  narrative  the  pro- 
babilities are  on  opposite  sides.  Thus  comparing  Luke's 
report  of  the  introduction  to  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
with  Matthew's,  one  is  inclined  to  give  his  form  of  the 
"  macarisms  :  "  "  Blessed  be  ye  poor.  Blessed  are  ye  that 
hunger.  Blessed  are  ye  that  weep," — the  preference  on 
account  of  their  brevity ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
"  woes  "  which  he  appends  to  them  seem  out  of  keeping 
with  the  spirit  of  the  discourse,  and  rather  inferences 
from  the  words  spoken  by  Jesus,  than  sayings  actually 
uttered  by  Him. 

On  the  whole,  the  evidence,  by  the  general  confession 
of  critics,  is  in  favour  of  the  comparative  originality  of 
Matthew's  reports.^     Thus  reverting  to  the  Sermon  on  the 

1  So  Weiss  {Das  Matthdus-Evangelium)  and  Wendt,  Die  Lehre  Jesu, 
S.  117.  The  ultimate  decision  of  the  question  depends  on  the  view 
we  take  as  to  the  original  form  of  the  Sermon.  If  Christ  discoursed 
on  righteousness  as  Matthew  reports,  it  would  be  quite  natural  that 
He  should  give  the  above  counsel  as  it  appears  in  the  lirst  Gospel. 
I  hesitate  to  give  my  assent  to  the  opinion  of  Weiss  and  Wendt. 

2  From  this  view  Pfleiderer,  in  his  recent  work  Das  Urchristenthum 
(1887),  decidedly  dissents.  In  his  whole  views  of  the  Gospels,  and 
their  relation  to  each  other,  as  set  forth  in  this  work,  he  departs 
widely  from  the  general  current  of  critical  opinion.     "  Mark  "  he 


CKITICAL  INTKODUCTION.  11 

Mount,  the  two  substitutions  above  referred  to  (%a/3i9  for 
/jLia66^,  and  olktlp/jlcdv  for  reXeto?)  wear  the  aspect  of 
an  attempt  to  replace  difficult  expressions  by  words  of 
simpler  meaning,  just  because  their  sense  is  less  obvious. 
Matthew's  phrases  are  to  be  regarded  as  the  more 
original.  Another  point  may  be  noted  here:  the  less 
frequent  use  of  the  title  "  Father "  for  God  in  Luke's 
Gospel,  as  compared  with  Matthew's.  Thus  for  the 
expression  "  the  children  of  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven"  (Matt.  v.  45),  Luke  gives  "the  children  of  the 
Highest"  (vi.  35);  and  for  Matthew's  "your  heavenly 
Father  feedeth  them"  (the  birds,  vi.  26),  Luke  has  the 
colder  "  God  feedeth  them  "  (xii.  24).  The  change  seems 
due  to  a  desire  to  restrict  the  Fatherhood  of  God  within 
the  spiritual  sphere,  ignoring  the  general  aspect  of  Divine 
Paternity  revealed  in  ordinary  Providence.  There  can 
be  little  doubt  that  the  broader  presentation  of  the  first 
evangelist  is  truer  to  the  style  of  the  Master,  and  that 
Jesus  saw  in  the  sunshine  and  in  the  rain  a  revelation  of 

regards  as  the  earliest  Gospel — the  first  attempt  to  present  the  gospel 
of  Jesus,  as  the  Christ  which  Paul  had  preached  as  a  theological 
doctrine,  in  the  form  of  a  history,  written  under  the  influence  of 
the  great  apostle  whose  scholar  the  author  probably  was  (S.  360). 
"  Luke "  comes  second ;  it  is  based  on  "  Mark,"  and  contains 
additions  due  not  so  much  to  other  historical  sources  as  to  the 
literary  genius  of  the  writer,  who  also  was  much  under  Paul's 
influence  (S.  417).  "  Matthew  "  was  the  latest,  originating  some  time 
after  the  beginning  of  the  second  century.  It  is  throughout 
dependent  on  "  Mark  "  and  "  Luke,"  and  is  a  harmonizing  combina- 
tion of  the  two  in  a  Churchly  interest,  written  by  a  man  who  was 
imbued  with  the  spirit  of  the  old  Catholic  Church  :  universalistic  yet 
not  Pauline,  rather  neonomian  (S.  479,  493).  In  comparison  with 
"  Luke,"  the  words  ascribed  to  our  Lord  in  "  Matthew"  are  held  to 
be  for  the  most  part  secondary. 


12  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

God's  paternal  love  to  all,  not  less  than  in  the  com- 
munication of  His  Holy  Spirit  a  revelation  of  the  same 
love  to  the  citizens  of  His  kingdom.  The  restriction  is 
made  in  the  interest  of  edification,  that  the  faithful 
might  value  more  God's  special  love  to  them  ;  neverthe- 
less it  is  •  a  narrowing  of  the  great  doctrine  of  God's 
Fatherhood,  as  taught  by  Christ. 

The  epilogue  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  as  given 
by  Luke  is  manifestly  secondary.  One  can  trace 
throughout  the  hand  of  an  editor  modifying,  expounding, 
abbreviating,  all  with  a  view  to  general  edification.  For 
Matthew's  "  Whosoever  heareth  these  sayings  of  mine," 
suited  to  the  original  hearers,  Luke  has  "  Whosoever 
Cometh  to  me,  and  heareth  my  sayings','  adapted  to  the 
case  of  all  disciples,  and  to  the  whole  of  Christ's  teaching. 
In  Luke's  version  the  diverse  action  of  the  two  builders 
to  whom  hearers  of  different  characters  are  compared,  in 
reference  to  the  foundation  of  the  house,  is  very  carefully 
described.  The  one  builder  is  represented  as  digging 
deep  till  he  came  to  the  rock,  while  the  other  is  repre- 
sented as  beginning  to  build  on  the  surface,  without  a 
foundation.  This  is  a  useful  commentary  on  the  Speaker's 
words  as  reported  in  the  first  Gospel,  but  it  is  a  com- 
mentary, not  an  exact  report.  The  description  of  the 
oncome  of  the  storm  that  w\as  to  try  the  two  houses  is 
very  graphic  in  Matthew.  "  Descended  the  rain,  came 
the  floods,  blew  the  winds : "  this  is  in  the  impassioned 
style  natural  to  one  winding  up  an  impressive,  solemn 
discourse.  The  eloquence  disappears  in  Luke's  narrative, 
and  for  it  we  have  simply  the  prosaic  statement :  "  When 
a  flood  arose,  the  stream  dashed  against  the  house." 


CEITICAL  INTKODUCTIOK  13 

The  discourses  of  Jesus,  as  reported  by  Matthew,  both 
in  substance  and  in  style,  correspond  to  the  actual  cir- 
cumstances in  which  the  Speaker  was  placed  :  they  recall 
the  world  of  Judea  as  it  existed  in  the  days  of  our  Lord. 
On  the  other  hand,  as  reported  by  Luke,  these  discourses 
seem  to  be  adapted  to  the  circumstances  and  needs  of  a 
somewhat  later  time,  that  of  the  Apostolic  Church. 
Critics  may  have  carried  this  distinction  too  far,  and 
discovered  traces  of  it  where  they  are  not  to  be  found ; 
but,  as  a  general  observation,  the  statement  just  made  is 
beyond  doubt.  The  badge  of  the  apostolic  age,  and  the 
proof  that  its  needs  and  modes  of  thought  influenced 
the  compiler  of  the  third  Gospel,  may  be  found  in  the 
frequent  use  of  the  two  phrases  "  the  Lord "  and  "  the 
apostles"  in  narratives  where  "Jesus"  and  "the  disciples" 
are  the  expressions  used  by  the  other  Synoptists/  The 
Great  Teacher  is  the  Lord  of  the  Church,  and  the  writer 
reports  His  sayings  in  forms  deemed  best  fitted  for  the 
instruction  of  its  members.  The  "  disciples  "  of  a  bygone 
time  are  now  the  apostles,  and  the  lessons  they  received 
from  the  Master  are  conceived  of  as  the  training  which 
fitted  them  for  their  high  position,  and  are  reported  from 
that  point  of  view.  Thus,  for  example,  in  narrating  the 
institution  of  the  Holy  Supper,  Luke  states  that  "  when 
the  hour  was  come  He  sat  down,  and  the  twelve  apostles 
with  Him."  He  thinks  of  them  as  getting  their  lesson 
how  to  celebrate  the  sacred  rite  commemorative  of  the 
Lord's  redeeming  death. 

1  The  remark  applies  specially  to  the  latter  of  the  two  phrases. 
For  examples  of  its  use  vide  Luke  vi.  13  ;  ix.  10  ;  xvii.  5  ;  xxii.  14. 
The  title  "  Lord  "  occurs  chiefly  in  sections  peculiar  to  Luke  ;  vide 
x.  1  ;  xi.  39  ;  xii.  42  ;  xiii.  15  ;  xvii.  5  ;  xviii.  6. 


14  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Assuming  the  comparative  originality  of  Matthew's 
report  as  established,  it  may  be  worth  while  to  form  an 
approximate  idea  of  the  character  and  extent  of  Luke's 
variations,  as  also  to  consider  more  fully  the  influences 
or  motives  to  which  they  probably  owe  their  origin. 
These  will  be  the  subjects  of  inquiry  in  the  two  following 
sections. 

SECTION    II. LUKE'S    VARIATIONS. 

The  phenomena  of  variation  in  Luke's  report  of  our 
Lord's  words,  as  compared  with  Matthew's,  may  be  classed 
under  three  heads  :  modifications,  omissions,  and  additions. 
Besides  these,  there  are  well-known  and  broadly  marked 
differences  between  the  two  evangelists  in  the  grouping 
and  setting  of  sayings ;  the  general  fact  here  being  that 
Matthew's  habit  is  to  collect  into  large  masses  sayings 
of  kindred  import,  while  Luke's  is  to  disperse  the 
material  of  these  collections  over  his  pages,  assigning  to 
the  dissociated  utterances  distinct  occasions.  This 
diversity  of  treatment  in  some  instances  has  a  by  no 
means  unimportant  influence  on  the  sense ;  nevertheless, 
it  is  not  proposed  to  take  any  further  notice  of  it  here, 
beyond  making  the  remark  that  it  is  obviously  incumbent 
on  the  interpreter  to  be  on  his  guard  against  laying  too 
much  stress  on  supposed  historical  connection.  In 
certain  cases  the  occasions  on  which  sayings  were  uttered 
can  be  definitely  ascertained,  and  in  all  such  cases  the 
most  should  be  made  of  the  setting  to  illustrate  the 
meaning  of  the  word.  But  there  are  instances  not  a  few, 
especially  in  the  long  section  of  Luke's  Gospel,  ix.  51— 


CRITICAL  INTEODUCTION.  15 

xviii.  14,  in  which  to  lay  emphasis  on  the  occasion 
would  be  to  follow  a  misleading  guidance.  The  evan- 
gelist found  valuable  materials  in  his  sources,  whose  exact 
place  in  the  history  was  not  known,  and  he  introduced 
them  into  his  narrative  w^here  it  seemed  expedient,  and 
with  such  preface  as  the  contents  suggested. 

I.  We  have  to  notice,  then,  in  the  first  place,  Luke's 
modifications.  These  occur  wherever  a  saying  of  Christ 
found  in  both  Gospels  (we  leave  Mark  out  of  account),  in 
terms  so  similar  on  the  whole  as  to  put  the  identity 
beyond  doubt,  is  given  in  the  third  Gospel  with  more  or 
less  variation  in  the  expression.  Such  modifications  are 
too  numerous  to  be  exhaustively  indicated  here ;  all  that 
can  be  done  is  to  give  a  selection  of  samples  with  tenta- 
tive notes  suggesting  possible  motives  for  variation.  The 
instances  which  have  been  already  alluded  to  in  the 
previous  section  are  omitted. 

1.  Luke  viii.  12  compared  with  Matthew  xiii.  19. 
Of  the  wayside  hearer  Jesus,  according  to  Matthew,  said : 
When  any  one  lieareth  the  word  of  the  kingdom,  and 
understa7ideth  it  not,  then  cometh  the  wicked  one  (6  7rovr]p6<;), 
and  snatcheth  away  that  which  hath  been  sown  in  the 
heart.  Luke  reports  the  saying  with  minor  variations, 
and  appends  this  significant  addition :  lest  they  should 
helieve  and  he  saved.  This  looks  like  a  gloss,  stating  in 
current  Pauline  or  Apostolic  Church  phraseology  the  end 
contemplated  in  the  preaching  of  the  word. 

2.  Luke  viii.  21  compared  with  Matthew  xiii.  50  (Mark 
iii.  35).  To  those  who  informed  Him  of  the  desires  of 
His  relatives  to  see  Him,  Jesus,  according  to  Matthew, 
replied :    Whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  my  Father  which 


16  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

is  in  heaven,  he  is  my  brother  and  sister  and  mother. 
Mark  has  the  will  of  God,  a  minor  variation.  But  in 
Luke  occurs  the  major  modification :  "  my  mother  and 
my  brethren  are  those  which  hear  the  word  of  God  and 
do  it"  "Word"  takes  the  place  of  "will/'  and  the 
spiritual  brotherhood  of  Christ  are  described  by  a  phrase 
which  sounds  secondary  and  stereotyped :  "  Those  who 
hear  the  word."  It  recurs  again  and  again  in  Luke's 
Gospel.  Mary  sat  at  the  feet  of  Jesus  and  heard  His 
word  (x.  39).  To  the  woman  in  the  crowd  who  ex- 
claimed :  "  Blessed  is  the  womb  that  bare  Thee,  and  the 
breasts  which  Thou  didst  suck ! "  Jesus  replies :  "  Yea, 
rather  blessed  are  they  that  hear  the  word  of  God  and 
keep  it"  (xi.  28).  The  substitution  of  "word"  for  "will" 
makes  Christ's  saying  concerning  His  brethren  more  evan- 
gelical, and  brings  it  more  into  line  with  the  phrase- 
ology current  among  believers  in  the  apostolic  age. 

3.  Luke  ix.  18-27  compared  with  Matthew  xvi.  13-28 
(Mark  viii.  27— ix.  1).  There  are  several  points  at  which 
Luke's  narrative  appears  secondary  as  compared  with 
Matthew's.  For  Matthew's  form  of  Peter's  confession: 
Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  Luke  has  the 
tame  expression :  the  Christ  of  God ;  what  was  for  the 
disciple  a  great  originality,  uttered  with  passionate  vehe- 
mence, having  become  in  the  circle  for  which  Luke  writes, 
or  from  which  his  version  emanated,  a  commonplace. 
In  the  saying  concerning  cross-bearing  :  If  any  man  will 
come  after  me,  let  him  deny  himself  and  take  up  his  cross 
and  folloio  me,  Luke  inserts  "  daily  "  {Kad"  rifxepav)  after 
the  cross,  which  seems  a  gloss  intended  to  adapt  the 
counsel  to  the  facts  of  spiritual  experience.     In  the  final 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  17 

prediction  that  some  of  those  present  with  the  speaker 
would  live  to  see  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in  His  kingdom, 
this  vivid  concrete  form  of  expression  is  replaced  in 
Luke's  text  by  the  vague  general  phrase :  till  they  see  the 
hingdom  of  God.  There  can  be  little  doubt  as  to  which 
is  the  more  original  version ;  there  may  be  some  doubt 
as  to  the  motive  of  the  change. 

4.  Luke  xi.  13  compared  with  Matt.  vii.  11.  The 
saying  is :  If  ye  then,  being  evil,  knoiu  how  to  give  good 
gifts  unto  your  children;  how  much  more  shall  your  Father 
yjhich  is  in  heaven  give  good  things  (aya6a)  to  them  that 
ask  Him^  Luke  retains  the  "good  gifts"  (BofzaTa  ayada) 
of  the  first  clause,  but  in  place  of  the  "  good  things  "  of 
the  second  he  puts  the  "  Holy  Spirit "  (Trvev/xa  dytov), 
God's  best  gift,  the  gift  the  children  of  the  kingdom  most 
desire,  the  gift  of  which  so  frequent  mention  is  made  in 
the  Pauline  Epistles,  though  it  is  referred  to  but  seldom 
in  the  synoptical  record  of  Christ's  teaching.  There  is 
nothing  to  be  said  against  the  substitution,  except  that 
it  is  in  all  probability  a  comment  on  what  Christ  said, 
rather  than  an  exact  report  of  His  precise  words. 

5.  Luke  xi.  20  compared  with  Matt.  xii.  28.  In  the 
discourse  in  which  He  defended  Himself  against  the 
blasphemous  suggestion  of  the  Pharisees  that  He  cast 
out  devils  by  the  aid  of  Beelzebub,  Jesus,  as  reported  by 
Matthew,  says :  If  I  hy  the  Spirit  of  God  (iv  Trvev/iaTc 
6eov)  cast  out  the  devils,  then  the  kingdom  of  God  is  come 
unto  you.  For  "  by  the  Spirit  of  God  "  Luke  reads  "  by 
the  finger  of  God  "  (eV  Ba/cTv\(p  Oeov).  Matthew's  version 
is  obviously  more  in  keeping  with  the  connection  of 
thought,  as  it  offers  a  defence  of  Christ's  moral  character, 


18  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

assailed  by  the  charge  of  being  in  league  with  Satan. 
Luke's  form  of  the  saying  gives  prominence  to  Christ's 
claim  to  be  in  possession  of  miraculous  power,  which, 
however  well  founded,  was  not  the  point  requiring  to  be 
insisted  on.  It  seems,  however,  to  have  been  one  of  the 
points  which  the  evangelist  desired  to  make  conspicuous 
in  his  narrative.  It  is  observable  in  his  reports  of 
miraculous  incidents  that  he  is  ever  careful  to  bring  out 
two  features — the  power  and  the  benevolence  of  Jesus. 
The  power  he  magnifies  by  specifying  particulars  tending 
to  show  the  aggravated  character  of  the  disease  healed. 
Peter's  mother-in-law  is  taken  with  a  great  fever  (iv.  38), 
the  leper  is  full  of  leprosy  (v.  12),  the  blind  man  at 
Jericho  needs  to  be  conducted  to  Jesus  (xviii.  40,  "Jesus 
stood  and  commanded  him  to  be  brought  unto  Him"). 
These  heightening  phrases  are  not  necessarily  exaggera- 
tions of  the  fact,  but  they  reveal  a  desire  to  make  the 
most  of  the  fact  as  a  foil  to  the  power  of  Christ.  The 
benevolence  of  the  Saviour,  Luke  signalizes  by  specifying 
particulars  tending  to  show  the  greatness  of  the  calamity 
from  which  He  delivers,  as  when  he  mentions  that  the 
subject  of  a  miracle  is  an  only  child  (widow's  son,  vii.  1 2 ; 
Jairus'  daughter,  viii.  30  ;  epileptic  boy,  ix.  47),  or  that 
the  withered  hand  cured  on  the  Sabbath  day  was  the 
right  one,  the  hand  by  which  the  man  earned  his  bread 
(vi.  6). 

6.  Certain  modifications  seem  to  have  sprung  out  of 
a  desire  to  tone  down  the  severity  of  Christ's  sayings. 
The  following  are  instances :  Luke  ix.  60:  "  Let  the  dead 
bury  their  dead,  hut  go  thou  and  preach  the  Icingdom  of 
God!'  compared  with  Matthew's  :  "  Follow  Me,  and  let  the 


CRITICAL  INTKODUCTION.  19 

dead  bury  their  dead."  A  special  vocation  and  the 
urgent  claims  of  the  kingdom  justify  neglect  of  ordinary 
duties.  Luke  xvii.  2  :  "It  were  better  for  him  (through 
whom  offences  come)  that  a  millstone  were  hanged  about 
his  neck,  and  he  cast  into  the  sea,  than  that  he  should 
offend  one  of  these  little  ones."  How  tame  compared 
w^ith  Matthew's  :  "  It  were  better  for  him  that  a  millstone 
turned  hy  an  ass  (//<uXo9  6vlic6<;,  larger  than  one  worked 
by  the  hand,  —  Luke's  phrase  is  \i6o^  fjuvXi/co^)  were 
hanged  about  his  neck,  and  that  he  were  drowned  in 
the  dejyth  of  the  sea "  (eV  tw  TreXdyec  rrjs  daXd(Tarj<; ; 
Luke :  ek  rrjv  OdXaoraav).  There  is  a  passion  in  these 
words  which  is  allowed  to  evaporate  in  the  milder 
version  of  the  third  Gospel.  Luke  xviii.  17:"  Verily 
I  say  unto  you.  Whosoever  shall  not  receive  the  kingdom 
of  God  as  a  little  child,  shall  in  nowise  enter  therein." 
This  is  Luke's  equivalent  for  Matthew's  stern  word  of 
rebuke  addressed  to  ambitious  disciples :  "  Except  ye  be 
converted,  and  become  as  little  children,  ye  shall  not 
enter  into  the  kingdom."  Think  of  future  apostles  being 
spoken  to  in  that  manner !  Luke  xii.  61:"  Suppose 
ye  that  I  am  come  to  give  peace  on  earth  ?  I  tell  you, 
Nay;  but  rather  division''  (Sta/jiepLafiov,  in  place  of 
Matthew's  sivord — fid'^cupav,  x.  34). 

As  an  offset  to  these  examples  of  subdued  expression 
may  be  cited  a  case  in  which  Luke's  report  intensifies 
the  severity  of  one  of  Christ's  hard  sayings.  For  the 
word  :  "  He  that  loveth  father  or  mother  more  than  Me, 
is  not  worthy  of  Me ;  and  he  that  loveth  son  or  daughter 
more  than  Me,  is  not  worthy  of  Me"  (Matt.  x.  37). 
Luke  has :  "  If  any  man  come  to  Me  and  hate  not  his 


20  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD, 

father  and  mother,  and  wife  and  children,  and  brethren 
and  sisters,  yea,  and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot  be  My 
disciple"  (xiv.  2 6).  Which  of  the  two  forms  is  the  original ; 
and  if  Matthew's  be,  whence  this  solitary  example  of 
intensified  expression  in  a  Gospel  whose  general  tendency 
seems  to  be  to  make  prominent  the  mildness  and 
amiability  of  Jesus  ?  I  incline  to  the  view  that 
Matthew's  form  is  the  more  original,  and  that  in  Luke's 
report  we  have  an  exception  to  his  rule  requiring  to  be 
accounted  for.  And  the  most  probable  account  seems 
to  be  that  the  word  "  hate  "  reflects  the  actual  experience 
of  the  Church.  Matthew's  form  gives  the  theory  of 
Christian  discipleship  as  quietly  spoken  by  the  Master 
into  the  ears  of  his  companions,  before  the  great  conflict 
his  mission  was  destined  to  originate  had  properly  begun. 
Luke's  gives  the  experience  of  Christian  disciples  when 
faith  in  Jesus  was  found  to  create  profound  alienations 
within  families,  unbelieving  members  cherishing  bitter 
hatred  against  members  that  had  become  believers ;  and 
believers,  if  not  hating  unbelieving  relatives,  being  com- 
pelled by  their  faith  to  assume  such  an  attitude  towards 
them  as  bore  to  the  world's  eye,  and  possibly  to  their 
own  feeling  at  times,  an  aspect  of  hatred.  Nothing 
divides  and  alienates  so  completely  as  earnest  divergence 
in  religious  belief  and  practice.  The  word  "  hate "  in 
Luke's  report  of  the  Lord's  lorjion  bears  testimony  to  this 
trutli.      I'robably  lie  found  it  in  his  sources. 

IL  Luke's  omissions.  By  an  omission  is  meant  not 
merely  a  certain  saying  or  discourse  of  Christ  given  by 
Matthew  and  not  found  in  Luke's  Gospel,  but  a  saying 
or  discourse  with  which  the  compiler  of  his  source,  or 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  21 

Luke  himself,  was  acquainted,  but  which  for  some  reason 
was  omitted  by  either  the  one  or  the  other.  The  dis- 
tinction between  a  non-appearance  and  an  omission  is 
important.  The  former  presupposes  ignorance,  and  tends 
to  throw  doubt  on  the  authenticity  of  an  unreported 
saying.  The  latter  is  intentional;  and  when  the  intention 
is  discovered,  the  absence  of  a  particular  saying  from  the 
record  given  in  one  Gospel  does  not  weaken  the  testimony 
to  its  genuineness  borne  by  another  Gospel  in  which  it  is 
found,  but  rather  tends  to  confirm  it.  The  position  of 
matters  then  is :  one  evangelist  knew  and  reported, 
another  evangelist  knew,  but  for  an  assignable  reason 
did  not  report. 

That  Luke  was  not  ignorant  of  all  he  does  not  report, 
may  in  some  instances  be  demonstrated.  A  notable 
and  instructive  example  may  be  found  in  the  omission 
from  his  Gospel  of  the  materials  contained  in  the 
long  section  of  Matthew's  Gospel,  chap.  xiv.  22— xvi.  12, 
to  which  in  the  main  corresponds  Mark  vi.  45-viii.  27. 
These  materials  belonged  to  the  common  synoptical 
tradition,  with  which  there  is  every  reason  to  believe 
Luke  was  acquainted.  And  by  inspection  of  his  narra- 
tive at  the  place  where  the  gap  occurs  we  can  detect 
traces  of  intentional  omission.  At  the  beginning  of  the 
omitted  section  we  find  Jesus,  after  the  feeding  of  the 
five  thousand,  alone  praying  (Matt.  xiv.  23  ;  Mark  ^d.  46); 
at  the  close  of  it  comes  in  the  narrative  of  the  conversa- 
tion at  Csesarea  Philippi  (Matt.  xvi.  13  ;  Mark  viii.  27). 
Luke  connects  the  praying  with  the  conversation  thus : 
"  And  it  came  to  pass  as  He  was  alone  praying.  His 
disciples  were  with  Him ;  and  He  asked  them,  saying, 


22  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Whom  say  the  people  that  I  am?"  (ix.  18),  so,  as  it 
were,  bringing  together  the  two  edges  of  the  gap,  and 
giving  apparent  continuity  to  a  fragmentary  narrative. 
The  materials  contained  in  this  demonstrably  intentional 
omission  will  be  found  very  instructive  as  to  the  motives 
of  omissions,  and  of  variations  in  general. 

Luke's  omissions  of  teachinc^  material  are  extensive, 
and  of  serious  import  in  connection  with  an  attempt  to 
give  a  connected  account  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ. 

1.  The  anti-Pharisaic  utterances   of   Christ  are  very 
much  curtailed.     The   sections  relating   to    alms-giving, 
praying,  and  fasting  in  Matthew's  version  of  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount  are  not  found  in  the  third  Gospel.     We 
miss  also  the  encounters  between  Jesus  and  the  Pharisees 
regarding  washing  of  hands  and  divorce.     The  great  anti- 
Pharisaic   discourse   in   Matt,  xxiii.  likewise  disappears, 
or  dwindles  to  a  couple  of  verses,  in  which  the  speaker 
warns  His  hearers  against  the  ostentation  of  the  scribei 
who  walked  in  long  robes,  loved  salutations  in  the  market 
places,  and  chief  seats  in  the  synagogues,  and  against  their 
detestable  hypocrisy  in  cloaking  robbery  of  the  defence- 
less with  long  prayers  (Luke  xx.  46,  47).      Some  of  the 
material  of  this  discourse,  indeed,  is  to  be  found  elsewhere 
(Luke  xi.  8  7-52);  but  important  portions,  such  as  the 
section  referring  to  the  immoral  casuistry  of  the  Ptabbis  in 
connection  with  oaths  (Matt,  xxiii.  16,  22),  are  entirely 
lacking.     The  effect  of  these  omissions  is,  that  from  Luke's 
Gospel  alone  it  would  be  impossible  to  present  a  complete 
view  of  Christ's  moral  criticism  of  the  prevalent  religion ; 
in  other  words,  of  His  doctrine  of  righteousness  on  its 
negative  side. 


CEITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  23 

2.  The  sayings  of  Jesus  bearing  on  the  meaning  of  His 
own  death  are  very  imperfectly  recorded  in  the  third 
Gospel.  Jesus  taught  His  disciples  four  lessons  on  that 
subject,  contained  in  as  many  texts,  which  are  either  not 
found  at  all  in  Luke,  or  very  partially  reported.  The 
first  lesson  was  given  at  Csesarea  Philippi,  where  Jesus 
taught  His  disciples  that  His  death  would  be  the  result  of 
His  moral  fidelity,  and  so  far  from  being  a  peculiar  event, 
was  only  one  instance  of  a  law  according  to  which  all 
who  live  faithfully  must  bear  a  cross.  Luke's  report  of 
the  words  which  form  the  basis  of  this  doctrine  is  very 
defective  (ix.  22-24, cf.  Matt.  xvi.  22-25).'  The  second 
lesson  was  conveyed  in  the  words :  "  The  Son  of  man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to 
give  His  life  a  ransom  for  the  many "  (Matt.  xx.  28; 
Mark  x.  45).  This  saying  does  not  occur  in  Luke,  nor 
the  story  of  the  ambitious  request  of  James  and  John  in 
connection  with  which  it  was  uttered.  The  third  lesson 
was  given  on  the  occasion  of  the  anointing  in  Bethany, 
when  Jesus  declared  that  wherever  the  gospel  was 
preached  in  the  whole  world,  Mary's  deed  would  be 
spoken  of  to  her  honour, — implying  an  affinity  between 
her  act  and  His  own  m  laying  down  His  life.  The  whole 
of  this  beautiful  story,  lovingly  narrated  by  Matthew  and 
Mark,  has,  to  our  surprise,  been  omitted  by  Luke.  The 
last  lesson  was  taught  in  the  words  spoken  at  the  insti- 
tution of  the  supper :  "  This  is  My  blood,  shed  for  the 

1  To  be  noted  is  the  omission  of  the  rebuke  administered  to  Peter 
for  opposing  his  Master's  purpose  to  meet  death  at  Jerusalem.  On 
this  Pfleiderer  remarks  :  "  He  (Luke)  is  everywhere  the  man  of  peace, 
who  will  remove  every  dark  shadow  from  the  sacred  personalities  of 
the  primitive  Church."     Urchristenthum,  S.  585. 


24  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

remission  of  sins"  The  vital  phrase  :  "  for  the  remission 
of  sins,"  is  wanting  in  Luke's  version.  These  omissions, 
assuming  acquaintance  with  the  material  omitted,  are 
perplexing.  How  are  they  to  be  explained  ?  Shall  we 
say  that  Luke  was  not  a  theologian,  but  a  moralist,  and 
that  therefore  we  must  not  be  surprised  if  we  find  not  in 
his  pages  a  special  doctrine  of  atonement,  but  only  a 
general  doctrine  of  grace  or  mercy  ? 

3.  Luke's  Gospel  contains  no  words  of  Christ  referring 
to  the  Church.  According  to  Matthew,  Christ  made  a 
very  important  declaration  on  that  subject  at  Csesarea 
Philippi,  pointing  to  the  founding  of  a  religious  society 
to  be  identified  with  His  name,  and  indicating  its  relation 
to  the  kingdom  of  God  which  had  been  the  main  theme 
of  His  preaching.  As  the  passage  in  question  is  not 
found  in  Mark,  it  may  legitimately  be  inquired  whether 
this  is  to  be  regarded  as  an  intentional  omission  on 
Luke's  part.  In  any  case,  the  fact  remains  that  the 
section  concerning  the  Church  is  lacking  in  his  Gospel, 
and  that  he  supplies  no  materials  for  a  doctrine  on  that 
subject  expressly  taught  by  the  Master. 

4.  It  is  not  necessary  to  do  more  than  simply  state 
that  we  miss  in  Luke's  Gospel  nearly  the  whole  of  the 
utterances  in  which,  according  to  Matthew's  report  of  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Jesus  defined  His  attitude  to  the 
Mosaic  law. 

5.  Among  the  surprises  of  Luke's  Gospel  is  the 
absence  from  its  pages  of  the  gracious  invitation  :  "  Come 
unto  Me,  all  ye  that  labour."  Can  it  be  that  the  evan- 
gelist, who  seems  to  take  delight  in  presenting  Jesus  in 
word  and  deed  as  the  Gracious  One,  passed  over  that 


CRITICAL  INTEODUCTION.  25 

beautiful  word,  having  it  before  his  eye  in  his  sources  ? 
I  have  stumbled  on  a  hypothetical  solution  of  this  pro- 
blem which  I  shall  explain  in  the  following  section.  If 
there  be  anything  in  it,  it  will  show  in  at  least  one 
instance  a  very  close  connection  between  Luke's  omissions 
and  his  additions. 

III.  Luke's  additions.  These  are  sufficiently  extensive 
to  have  made  it  necessary  to  make  room  for  them  in  the 
narrative  by  reducing  the  matter  taken  from  the  common 
tradition,  and  to  have  raised  the  question,  for  a  compiler 
who  desired  to  keep  his  narrative  within  moderate  limits, 
what  could  best  be  spared.  They  have  for  the  most 
part  a  common  character,  being  nearly  all  fitted  and 
presumably  intended  to  bring  into  view  the  benevolence 
or  loving-kindness  of  Christ.  The  earliest  within  the 
period  of  the  public  ministry,  the  account  of  the  discourse 
in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth  (iv.  16—30),  may  be  said  to 
furnish  the  keynote  of  the  whole.  The  words  Jesus 
spake  on  that  occasion  the  evangelist  characterizes  as 
"  words  of  grace."  All,  or  nearly  all,  his  additions  to  the 
stock  of  evangelic  traditions  may  be  said  to  be  reports 
either  of  "  words  of  grace  "  or  of  acts  of  grace.  To  the 
latter  head  may  be  referred  the  raising  of  the  son  of  the 
widow  of  Nain  (vii.  11),  and  the  healing  of  the  woman 
who  had  a  spirit  of  infirmity  (xiii.  10).  The  gracious 
reception  given  to  the  woman  who  was  a  sinner 
(vii.  36-50),  and  to  Zacchaeus  the  chief  publican 
(xix.  1),  exhibit  in  a  signal  manner  Christ's  humane 
bearing  towards  persons  belonging  to  proscribed  classes. 
The  Samaritan  incidents,  the  rebuke  of  the  proposal  to 
call  down  fire  from  heaven  (ix.  51),  and  the  healing  of 


26  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

ten  lepers,  one  being  a  Samaritan,  and  he  the  only 
grateful  one  (xvii.  11),  exhibit  the  same  benignant  spirit 
towards  a  people  treated  by  the  Jews  as  pagans.  The 
words  of  grace,  preserved  alone  by  Luke,  are  many  and 
beautiful,  comprising  the  parables  of  the  tivo  debtors, 
the  good  Samaritan,  the  great  supper  ;  the  three  parables 
concerning  the  finding  of  the  lost,  and  that  of  the 
Pharisee  and  the  publican. 

For  the  sake  of  these  words  and  works  of  grace,  Luke 
might  well  deem  himself  justified  in  leaving  out  of  his 
narrative  materials  of  a  different  character  already  well 
known,  or  of  less  value  at  least  for  those  whose  benefit 
he  had  specially  in  view ;  such  as  severe  words  against 
the  patrons  of  counterfeit  righteousness,  duplicate  miracles 
teaching  the  same  lesson,  and  incidents  or  sayings  liable 
to  be  misunderstood,  or  that  might  tend  to  obscure  the 
very  grace  which  he  made  it  his  business  to  magnify, 
like  that  of  the  Syro-Phoenician  woman. 

It  may  be  taken  for  granted  that  for  all  these  addi- 
tions Luke  found  vouchers  among  his  sources.  It  seems 
not  improbable  that  he  modified  sayings  by  added  glosses 
or  substituted  expressions,  but  there  is  not  the  slightest 
reason  to  believe  that  he  invented  logia.  How  far  his 
editorial  liberties  might  go,  we  may  learn  from  one  of 
his  additions  not  yet  referred  to — the  mission  of  the 
seventy.  Even  such  a  critic  as  Weiss  is  inclined  to 
think  that  this  mission  did  not  take  place,  but  that  Luke 
simply  attached  it  as  a  heading  to  the  second  of  two 
versions  of  the  instructions  to  the  twelve  which  he 
found  in  his  sources.  I  do  not  deem  a  second  mission 
of   some   kind   so   improbable   as   some    imagine.       Our 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  27 

Lord's  word,  "  the  harvest  is  plenteous,  but  the  labourers 
are  few,"  shows  His  anxiety  for  an  increase  in  the 
number  of  sympathetic  evangelists.  It  is  therefore 
likely  that  He  would  send  out  more  if  they  were  forth- 
coming ;  and  that  they  were,  appears  from  the  account 
of  the  three  aspirants  in  Luke  ix.  57-62.  He  might 
send  them  forth  as  they  presented  themselves,  not 
waiting  till  a  large  number  had  been  accumulated,  but 
despatching  them  piecemeal  two  and  two.  Tradition 
may  have  made  the  number  thus  sent  out  amount  to  the 
symbolical  seventy,  and  transformed  a  mission  in  detail 
into  a  solemn  mission  of  the  whole  at  one  time,  accom- 
panied by  such  instructions  as  Luke  records.  This  is 
conceivable ;  that  it  is  what  actually  occurred,  I  do  not 
say.  But  suppose  the  fact  were  that  there  was  no 
mission  but  that  of  the  twelve,  and  that  the  mission  of 
the  seventy  is  an  invention  of  Luke,  or  of  those  to  whom 
he  owed  his  information,  the  point  to  be  noted  is  that 
for  this  "  invented "  mission  there  are  no  invented 
instructions.  The  instructions  are  simply  a  repetition  in 
substance  of  those  given  to  the  twelve.  If  Luke 
furnished  unhistorical  settings  for  some  sayings  of 
Jesus,  this  was  the  limit  of  his  editorial  licence  :  he 
reported  no  sayings  which  he  did  not  believe  to  be  in 
substance  genuine  logia  of  the  Master.  This  we  observe 
to  be  the  case  where,  as  in  the  instance  before  us,  we 
have  the  means  of  controlling  him,  and  we  may  con- 
fidently assume  that  it  is  his  way  where  he  reports 
words  not  elsewhere  found.^ 

^  Luke's  care  in  preserving  valuable  sayings  left  orphans  through 
his  omissions,  by  affiliating  them  with  favourite  utterances  to  which 


28  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 


SECTION  III. THE  MOTIVES  OF  LUKE  S  VARIATIONS. 

As  the  long  section,  Matt.  xiv.  22-xvi.  12,  supplies 
us  with  the  most  probable  instance  of  intentional  omis- 
sion on  Luke's  part,  an  analysis  of  its  contents  may  form 
a  suitable  introduction  to  a  study  of  the  causes  or 
motives  of  the  variations  specified  in  the  foregoing  section. 
It  contains  (1)  a  storm  on  the  lake  of  Gennesaret,  a 
second  of  the  kind  (xiv.  25-33);  (2)  an  encounter 
between  Jesus  and  the  scribes  in  regard  to  neglect  of 
ceremonial  ablutions  (xv.  1—20);  (3)  the  story  of  the 
Syro -Phoenician  woman  (xv.  21-28);  (4)  the  feeding  of 
4000,  a  second  incident  of  the  kind  (xv.  32-38);  (5)  the 
demand  of  the  Pharisees  with  the  Sadducees  for  a  sign 
from  heaven  (xvi.  1-12).  The  five  sections  reduce 
themselves  to  three  classes  :  two  duplicates,  two  encounters 
with  the  representatives  of  current  religion,  and  one  example 
of  apioarent  limitation  of  symipatliy  luithin  the  hounds  of  the 
chosen  people.     The  categories  under  which  they  are  thus 

they  become  as  adopted  children,  can  be  illustrated  from  his  version 
of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  By  the  omission  of  the  section,  Matt. 
V.  38-42,  concerning  the  law  of  retaliation  ("an  eye  for  an  eye"), 
the  ethical  maxim  "  resist  not  evil "  and  its  concrete  examples  : 
if  one  smite  thee  on  the  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  left ;  if  one  take 
thy  coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloak  also — become  orphaned.  They  are 
too  good  to  lose.  What  docs  Luke  do  1  He  brings  these  sayings 
under  the  head  of  the  great  law  of  love  :  "  Love  your  enemies,"'  etc., 
which  appears  in  his  version  of  the  Sermon  as  the  sum  of  all  ethical 
precepts.  By  this  device  all  that  is  valuable  is  preserved.  That  it  is 
an  editorial  device  appears  from  the  repetition  of  the  precept :  "  Love 
your  enemies  "  (vi.  27,  35).  In  this  instance  we  see  Luke  showing 
himself  careful  of  words,  careless  of  original  historical  connections. 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION".  29 

grouped  suggest  the  probable  motives  of  omission.  Omis- 
sions of  the  first  class  are  very  intelligible,  and  we  can  easily 
conceive  the  evangelist  making  them  without  a  moment's 
hesitation.  He  may,  however,  have  had  two  thoughts 
before  finally  deciding  on  the  other  omissions.  For  some 
of  the  words  spoken  by  Jesus  on  the  occasions  to  which 
the  omitted  sections  refer  are  very  remarkable,  e.g.  these : 
Ye  have  made  the  commandments  of  God  of  none  effect  hy 
your  tradition;  and  not  tliat  which  goeth  into  the  mouth 
defilcth  a  man,  hut  that  ivhich  cometh  out  of  the  mouth,  this 
defileth  a  man.  These  utterances,  so  pregnant  with  moral 
significance  and  revolutionary  in  tendency,  must  have 
possessed  deep  interest  for  a  man  of  Pauline  sympathies 
like  Luke,  and  one  would  imagine  also  for  the  readers  he 
had  chiefly  in  view.  Why,  then,  does  he  pass  over  the 
narrative  in  which  they  occur  ?  No  more  likely  answer 
suggests  itself  than  that  the  encounter  it  records  belonged 
to  a  local  and  temporary  controversy  between  Jesus  and 
the  representatives  of  traditional  religion  in  Judsea,  which, 
however  fierce  in  spirit  and  tragic  in  result,  appeared  to 
the  evangelist  of  secondary  importance  to  the  permanent 
interests  of  the  Christian  faith.  These  conflicts  were  to 
him  but  the  morning  mists  through  which  the  Sun  of 
righteousness  had  to  clear  His  way  to  meridian  splendour. 
If  this  motive  was  at  work,  it  would  account  not  only  for 
the  two  omissions  in  the  passage  now  under  considera- 
tion, but  for  the  disappearance  from  Luke's  Gospel  of 
large  masses  of  material  relating  to  the  same  general 
subject.  The  plain-spoken  working  out  of  the  principle, 
that  not  that  which  goeth  into  the  mouth  defileth,  might 
bring  into  play  a  feeling  of  delicacy  as  a  subsidiary  motive 


30  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

for  omission  in  connection  with  tlie  earlier  of  the  two 
incidents. 

The  appearance  of  a  grudging,  unsympathetic  attitude 
towards  the  pagan  world,  presented  by  the  behaviour  of 
Jesus  towards  the  Syro-Phcenician  woman,  in  all  proba- 
bility supplied  at  least  one  motive  for  the  omission  of 
that  pathetic  story.  The  evangelist  shrank  from  record- 
ing anything  that  might  create  in  the  minds  of  his 
readers  the  false  and  injurious  impression  that  the  Author 
of  the  Christian  faith  was  animated  by  anti  -  Gentile 
prejudices.  This  motive  may  have  been  assisted  by 
another — the  feeling  that  the  incident  in  question  might 
be  omitted  without  loss  of  anything  valuable,  as  virtually 
a  duplicate.  For  the  story  of  the  centurion,  as  related 
in  Luke's  Gospel,  is  so  constructed  as  to  present  the  good 
features  of  the  kindred  story  of  the  woman  of  Canaan 
without  its  drawbacks.  An  excessive  humility  is  ascribed 
to  the  centurion,  which  in  effect  echoes  the  sentiment : 
"We  Gentiles  are  dogs."  Then  the  intercession  of  the 
elders  of  the  Jews  takes  the  place  of  the  entreaties  of 
the  disciples  for  the  distracted  Syrian  mother.  Finally, 
the  compliance  of  Jesus,  and  His  unfeigned  admiration 
for  the  faith  displayed,  appear  with  their  value  undi- 
minished by  any  preliminary  hesitations.^ 

From  this  group  of  omissions,  as  above  explained,  com- 
bined with  the  prevaih'ng  character  of  Luke's  additions, 
we  may  draw  this  general  inference :  that  the  third 
evangelist,  having  supreme  regard  to  the  religious  edifica- 
tion of  his  readers,  omitted  matter  which  appeared  com- 
paratively useless,  unprofitable,  or  liable  to  be  misunder- 
1  Luke  vii.  1-10. 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  31. 

stood,  to  make  room  for  matter  tending  to  exhibit  Christ 
in  the  fulness  of  His  grace  as  the  friend  of  sinners, 
publicans,  Samaritans,  and  even  Gentiles.  Now,  if  this 
motive  influenced  him  in  any  part  of  his  work  as  the 
compiler  of  a  Gospel,  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  assume 
that  it  would  influence  him  throughout.  In  other  words, 
we  may  trace  the  influence  of  a  regard  to  edification,  not 
only  in  omissions  and  additions,  but  also  in  modifications 
of  sayings  by  alterations  in  expression.  In  the  notes 
appended  to  the  samples  of  such  alteration  given  in  the 
foregoing  section,  suggestions  as  to  possible  motives  of 
change  are  tentatively  offered.  These  may  be  reduced 
to  two  main  heads :  the  style  of  Christ's  sayings  adapted 
(1)  to  existing  habits  of  thought  and  expression  on 
religious  topics ;  and  (2)  to  the  sentiments  of  reverence 
and  love  towards  the  person  of  Christ  cherished  by 
writer  or  readers,  or  both.  How  far  changes  of  this  sort 
originated  with  Luke,  and  how  far  they  were  a  datum  for 
him  in  his  sources,  cannot  be  determined.  The  question 
of  importance  for  us  is.  To  what  influence  are  existing 
variations  due  ?  When  we  have  ascertained  these,  we 
are  furnished  with  the  means  of  determining  with  a 
measure  of  exactness  the  primitive  form  of  the  words  of 
Christ. 

That  both  the  forms  of  influence  just  specified,  that  of 
the  religious  life  of  the  Church  in  general,  and  that  of 
the  idea  of  Christ  cherished  by  believers  in  particular, 
can  be  traced  in  Luke's  report  of  our  Lord's  sayings, 
must,  I  think,  be  conceded.  Of  exceptional  interest  for 
the  student  are  the  indications  belonging  to  the  latter 
category.     Eeading  Luke's  Gospel  with  a  critical  eye,  one 


32  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

obtains  a  very  vivid  idea  of  Christ  as  he  conceived  Him, 
and  loved  to  contemplate  Him,  and  to  present  Him  to 
the  view  of  others.  He  is  full  of  grace,  ever  revealing 
itself  in  word  and  deed.  He  is  the  sympathetic  friend  of 
the  sinful,  such  as  she  who  came  into  Simon's  house,  of 
publicans  like  Zacchaeus,  of  Samaritans,  of  Gentiles  like 
the  centurion  of  Capernaum.  He  is  the  Lord.  He  is 
possessed  of  unlimited  divine  power,  and  works  miraculous, 
astonishing  cures  by  the  very  finger  of  God.  He  is  Him- 
self divine ;  the  inversion  of  the  order  of  the  temptations 
in  the  desert  seems  due  to  a  desire  to  make  this  pro- 
minent. Christ's  last  word  in  Luke's  narrative  is : 
"  Thou  shalt  not  tempt  the  Lord  thy  God."  When  that 
word  had  been  spoken,  it  was  meet  that  temptation  should 
cease.  His  fellowship  with  His  Father  is  uninterrupted 
and  unclouded  even  in  the  hour  of  death.  The  bitter 
cry  on  the  cross :  "  My  God,  my  God,  why  hast  Thou 
forsaken  me  ?  "  is  replaced  by  :  "  Father,  into  Thy  hands 
I  commend  my  spirit."  That  the  character  and  public 
conduct  of  Jesus  had  a  stern  side  Luke  knows,  and  does 
not  altogether  conceal,  but  he  keeps  it  well  in  the  back- 
ground. He  reduces  the  withering  exposure  of  Phari- 
saism to  a  minimum,  and  seeks  to  soften  the  seeming 
asperity  of  the  little  he  retains  by  representing  Christ, 
when  uttering  the  words  reported,  as  in  friendly  relations 
with  the  criticized  class.  The  free-spoken  words  are  the 
table-talk  of  Jesus  sitting  at  table  as  the  guest  of  mem- 
bers of  the  Pharisaic  fraternity.  Luke  thus  makes  Jesus 
appear  as  a  genial,  wide-hearted  man  who  shuns  nobody ; 
eating  to-day  with  publicans  and  "  sinners,"  to-morrow 
with  "  holy  "  people,  but  speaking  His  mind  frankly. in  all 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  33 

companies  with  royal  freedom.^  He  tones  down  words 
that  seem  to  be  spoken  with  passionate  vehemence,  such  as 
that  concerning  the  millstone,  and  the  other  in  the  same 
discourse  to  ambitious  disciples  concerning  the  necessity 
of  a  radical  change  of  spirit  in  order  to  admission  into  the 
divine  kingdom.  He  does  not  allow  his  beloved  Lord  to 
appear  either  as  a  bitter  controversialist  or  as  a  pitilessly 
severe  Master.  Nor  does  his  Gospel  supply  even  a 
plausible  pretext  for  the  allegation  that  the  founder  of  the 
Christian  faith  was  a  man  of  narrow  Jewish  prejudices. 
The  story  of  the  woman  of  Canaan  is  left  out,  and  the  hard 
word,  "  Let  him  be  unto  thee  as  an  heathen  man  and  a 
publican,"  given  by  Matthew  in  connection  with  his  second 
reference  to  the  Church^  is  not  found  in  his  pages. 

For  the  immediate  needs  of  the  section  of  the  Church 
for  which  Luke  wrote  this  picture  of  Christ  may  have  been 
wisely  drawn,  and  he  is  not  to  be  blamed  for  the  bias  he 
manifests.  Nevertheless,  it  remains  true  that  the  Christ 
thus  presented  is  a  partial,  one-sided  one,  and  that  the  per- 
manent needs  of  the  Church  and  of  the  Christian  faith 
demand  that  the  sterner  side  of  passionate,  relentless  abhor- 
rence of  counterfeit  sanctity,  as  exhibited  in  the  Pharisees, 
and  of  selfish  ambition  intruding  into  the  kingdom  of  God, 
as  exhibited  in  His  own  disciples,  should  be  fully  shown. 
Therefore  we  have  reason  to  be  thankful  that  the  par- 
tiality of  one  evangelist  is  supplemented  by  the  healthy 
realism  of  another,  who  seems  to  have  thought  that  the 

1  Vide  Luke  vii.  36,  xi.  37,  xiv.  1. 

2  Matt,  xviii.  17.  The  presence  of  tliis  word  in  this  passage  may 
have  been  the  reason  why  this  second  allusion  to  the  Church  is  also 
omitted  by  Luke. 

C 


34  THE  lUNGDOM  OF  GOD. 

character  of  Christ  could  look  after  itself,  and  that  his 
business  was  to  state  facts,  however  apparently  ungenial. 
That  Matthew  had  his  bias  may  be  true ;  that  he  had  a 
less  clear  insight  into  the  grace  of  Christ  than  Luke  is 
probable ;  it  certainly  does  not  receive  from  him  the 
same  broad,  effective  delineation.  But  it  must  be  con- 
ceded that  the  face  of  Jesus,  as  he  shows  it,  is  very  real 
and  life-like.  And  that  face  inspires  us  with  trust  and 
admiration ;  trust  in  His  humanity,  admiration  for  His 
heroic  moral  fidelity.  There  He  stands,  the  sympathetic 
people's  Friend,  the  wise  Master,  the  fearless  Prophet — 
the  genuine  Jesus  of  Nazareth. 

Luke  is  far  excellence  the  evangelist  of  grace.  But 
why,  then,  does  he  omit  matter  peculiarly  evangelic,  e.g. 
the  gracious  invitation,  "  Come  unto  Me,  all  ye  that 
labour  and  are  heavy  laden "  ?  I  should  be  sorry  to 
think  it  was  from  ignorance,  for  that  might  tend  to  throw 
doubt  on  the  authenticity  of  one  of  the  most  charming  of 
all  the  evangelic  logia.  But  if  Luke  knew  the  saying,  is 
his  omission  of  it  not  quite  unaccountable  ?  The  problem 
has  exercised  the  critics,  and  various  explanations  have 
been  suggested.  Weiss  thinks  that  Luke  passed  the 
passage  over  because  he  found  the  transition  from  the 
previous  context  too  abrupt.^  Holtzmann  is  of  opinion 
that  Luke  stumbled  at  some  of  the  expressions,  such  as 
the  epithet  Tair^ivo^,  humble,  applied  to  Jesus,  and 
fu709  and  (poprlov,  as  savouring  of  legalism,  and  suggest- 
ing ideas  of  bondage  and  burdensomeness  incongruous 
with  the  Gospel.^     But  supposing   these  words  were  dis- 

^  Das  Alatthiius-Evangelium,  in  loc. 
2  Die  Spioptischen  Evangelien,  S.  147. 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  35 

tasteful  to  him,  one  does  not  see  why  he  could  not 
substitute  for  them  others  more  evangelic,  as  he  did  in 
his  report  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  Accordingly 
Wendt,  who  in  his  reconstruction  of  the  book  of  Logia, 
assumed  to  be  a  source  for  Luke,  includes  the  gracious 
invitation,  confesses  himself  unable  to  offer  any  explana- 
tion of  its  omission.  "  This  section,"  he  remarks,  "  Luke 
has  passed  over  without  any  perceptible  good  reason. 
The  words  form  a  very  suitable,  one  may  even  say 
necessary,  continuation  of  the  foregoing  discourse."  -^ 

When  such  scholars  fail,  it  may  seem  presumptuous 
in  any  one  else  to  hope  to  succeed.  Nevertheless  I  will 
venture  to  throw  out  the  thought  which  has  occurred  to 
me.  It  seems  to  me,  then,  that  Luke  found  in  his 
source,  at  the  place  where  the  gracious  invitation  occurs, 
probably  written  on  the  margin,  as  illustrative  examples, 
the  three  incidents  recorded  in  Luke  x.  25—42,  xi.  1-13  : 
the  Good  Samaritan  (x.  25-37),  Martha  and  Mary  (x. 
38-42),  and  the  lesson  on  Prayer,  in  answer  to  the  request 
of  the  disciples  (xi.  1-13).  These  incidents  occupy 
much  the  same  place  in  Luke's  Gospel  that  the  gracious 
invitation  occupies  in  Matthew's.  In  both,  the  passage 
beginning  with  "I  thank  Thee,  0  Father,"  forms  the 
preceding  context,  only  that  Luke  appends  to  that  passage, 
as  given  by  Matthew,  the  saying :  "  Blessed  are  the  eyes 
which  see  the  things  that  ye  see,"  placed  in  the  first 
Gospel  in  a  different  connection.-    After  the  gracious  invi- 

1  Die  Lehre  Jesu,  Erster  Theil,  S.  92. 

2  Matt.  xiii.  16,  17,  in  connection  with  the  parables.  Luke  gives 
it  in  connection  with  the  results  of  the  evangelistic  mission  of  the 
Seventy  (x.  23,  24). 


36  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

tation  in  Matthew's  Gospel  come  the  sabbatic  incidents : 
"  disciples  plucking  ears  of  corn,"  and  "  man  with  withered 
hand"  (xii.  1-14).     These  Luke,  following  the  order  of 
Mark,  disturbed  in  Matthew's  record,  records  at  an  earlier 
stage  in  his  Gospel,  so  that  he  passes  on  directly  from 
the  lesson  on   Prayer   to   the  discourse   on   Blasphemy, 
which  in  Matthew  follows  immediately  after  the  above- 
named  sabbatic  incidents.     The  three  incidents  reported 
by  Luke  in  the  place  occupied  by  the  gracious  invitation 
in  Matthew's  Gospel  have,  moreover,  all  this  in  common, 
that  they  exhibit  Christ  as  a   Teacher,  and  there  is  no 
other  perceptible  link  of  connection  accounting  for  their 
being  placed  side   by  side.      But   Christ   appears  as   a 
teacher   in   many   other   passages   in   the   Gospel ;    why 
should  these  three  be  selected  and  formed  into  a  group 
by  themselves,  as  woodcuts,  so  to  speak,  illustrating  the 
"  Come  unto  Me  "  ?     If  there  is  anything  in  my  hypo- 
thesis, it  must  be  because  these  incidents  illustrate  the 
salient  points  of  Matthew's  Logion.     And  I  think  on  exa- 
mination this  will  be  found  to  be  the  case.     The  salient 
points    in    the  Logion    are    the    Scholars  Burden  —  the 
persons  invited  to  Christ's  school  are  the  "  labouring  and 
heavy  laden  ; "  the  Teachers  Meekness :  "  I  am  meek  and 
lowly  in  heart ;  "  and  the  Best-lringing  Lesson :  "  Ye  shall 
find  rest  unto  your  souls."     The  characters  brought  before 
us  in  the  three  incidents  of  Luke  are  all  in  diverse  ways 
burdened  ones.     The  burden  of  the  lawyer  was  an  arti- 
ficial Eabbinical  system ;  the  burden  of  Martha,  happily 
escaped  by  Mary,  is  the  cares  of  life ;  the  burden  of  the 
disciples    is    unfulfilled    spiritual    desire,    struggling    for 
utterance,  despairing  of    satisfaction.     The  meekness  of 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  37 

the  Master  is  conspicuous  in  all  three  instances  :  in  the 
first  He  meekly  instructs  one  who  comes  rather  asking 
captious  questions  than  in  the  humble  guise  of  a  true 
disciple ;  in  the  second  He  soothes  the  irritable  house- 
wife with  a  gentle  "  Martha,  Martha ; "  in  the  third  He 
enters  with  deep  human  sympathy,  as  well  as  with  super- 
human wisdom,  into  the  spiritual  perplexities  of  disciples. 
And  in  each  case  a  rest-giving  word  is  spoken.  To  the 
lawyer  is  taught  the  infinitude  of  duty,  neighbourhood 
wide  as  the  world,  whereby  the  spirit  is  allowed  to  escape 
like  a  bird  from  the  cage  of  artificial  restriction  into  the 
boundless  atmosphere  of  Humanity.  To  Martha  is  hinted 
the  supreme  worth  of  the  kingdom,  the  theme  of  all  the 
Teacher's  discourse ;  whereby  earthly  cares  are  put  into 
their  proper  place  of  subordination.  To  the  disciples  is 
given  a  form  of  prayer  which  they  can  use  till  they  have 
outgrown  the  need  of  it,  and  a  parabolic  instruction  in 
the  art  of  waiting  for  good  earnestly  desired  but  long 
withheld. 

What  Luke  does,  therefore,  is  to  give  us  a  substitute  for 
Matthew's  gTacious  invitation.  Instead  of  making  Christ 
say,  "  Come,  ye  burdened  ones,  to  My  school,  and  I  will 
give  you  rest,"  he  conducts  us  into  Christ's  school,  and 
shows  Him  in  the  act  of  giving,  with  the  meekness  of 
wisdom,  rest-bringing  instruction  to  burdened  spirits. 
It  may  be  asked,  indeed.  What  hindered  him  from  giving 
both  the  invitation  to  school  and  the  samples  of  work 
going  on  in  the  school ;  pointing  to  the  one  as  the 
inscription  over  the  door,  offering  the  other  as  induce- 
ments to  enter  ?  If  the  gracious  invitation  was  in  the 
text  of  his  source,  and  the  illustrations  on  the  margin. 


38  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

how  natural  to  retain  the  text  and  add  to  it  by  intro- 
ducing the  marginal  comments  !  Or  did  comments  over- 
lay text,  hiding  it  from  view,  rendering  it  illegible  ? 
Conjectures  are  idle.  One  thing  only  seems  probable, 
that  the  saying,  "  Come  unto  Me,"  was  a  nucleus  around 
which  gathered  gradually  these  beautiful  stories  illustra- 
tive of  Christ's  method  as  a  teacher.  The  alternative 
hypothesis,  that  the  stories  came  first,  and  that  the 
invitation  was  abstracted  from  them,  is  possible,  but 
unlikely.^ 


SECTION  IV. THE  SYNOPTICAL  TYPE  OF  DOCTRINE. 

The  scope  of  the  study  which  goes  by  the  name  of  New 
Testament  Theology  may  be  variously  defined.  It  may 
be  vaguely  and  comprehensively  regarded  as  an  attempt 
to  ascertain  and  set  forth  in  order  the  views  to  be  found 
in  the  various  groups  of  New  Testament  books  on  all 
manner   of   religious   and    theological    topics.     With   so 

^  Pfieiderer  regards  Matt.  xi.  28-30  as  a  free  citation  out  of  Siracli 
li.  23,  where  the  Divine  Wisdom  invites  the  ignorant  to  come  to  her 
and  dwell  in  the  house  of  instruction.  There  is  a  certain  resemblance 
in  some  of  the  expressions  which  led  me,  in  reading  this  apocryphal 
book  some  years  ago,  to  make  a  marginal  reference  to  Matt,  xi,  28-30. 
Pfieiderer  expresses  the  opinion  that  in  future  we  will  have  to  fami- 
liarize ourselves  with  the  thought  that  the  light  rays  of  the  Gospels 
have  not  come  so  directly  from  the  one  point  of  the  historical  person 
of  Jesus  as  to  the  unaided  eye  of  the  Church,  in  virtue  of  a  natural 
optical  illusion,  seemed  to  be  the  case,  but  have  emanated  also  from 
the  creative  geniality  or  insj)iration  of  the  evangelists,  and  are  often 
to  be  traced  only  indirectly  to  the  common  light-fountain  in  the 
Spirit  of  Jesus.  It  will  be  a  while  before  we  reconcile  ourselves  to 
the  view  that  we  have  to  thank  Matthew,  rather  than  Christ,  for  the 
Gracious  Invitation. 


CRITICAL  INTEODUCTIOX.  39 

wide  a  range  it  is  apt  to  become  a  rather  pointless  and 
wearisome  exercise.  There  is  one  mode  of  lookino-  at 
this  department  of  theological  inquiry  which,  if  not 
exhaustive,  has  at  least  the  merit  of  definiteness  and 
unflagging  interest,  that,  viz.,  which  makes  it  have 
supreme  reference  to  the  main  drift  and  raison  d'etre  of 
the  literature  to  be  studied.  Why  is  there  a  New 
Testament  ?  Because  Jesus  Christ  came  into  the  world 
an  epoch-making  personage  in  the  history  of  religion  and 
revelation.  The  question  of  sovereign  importance  there- 
fore is,  What  is  the  significance  of  the  new  epoch  ?  what 
is  the  good  Christ  brought  to  men  ?  The  Highest  Good 
it  must  be,  if  Jesus  be  indeed  the  Christ,  the  fulfiller  of 
the  promises  and  hopes  of  foregoing  ages.  What,  then, 
is  the  summumi  honum  ?  The  New  Testament  contains 
the  answer  to  the  question,  and  New  Testament  theology 
has  for  its  chief,  if  not  sole  problem,  to  ascertain  what 
the  answer  is.  It  may  therefore  be  defined  as  the  study 
of  the  leading  types  of  doctrine  concerning  the  things 
freely  given  to  us  of  God  in  Jesus  Christ. 

Leading  types  I  say,  for  the  New  Testament  writings 
do  not  all  present  the  gift  of  divine  grace  under  precisely 
the  same  point  of  view.  Four  types  may  be  distinguished, 
not  of  course  antagonistic  or  mutually  exclusive,  rather 
closely  related ;  yet  distinct,  and  capable  of  being 
associated  with  certain  books.  These  types  have 
objective  and  not  merely  subjective  value ;  they  are 
more  than  modes  under  which  particular  writers 
apprehended  the  truth,  deriving  their  colour  from 
personal  idiosyncrasy  and  peculiar  experience,  though 
these   elements   have    their   place.       They   are   different 


40  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

aspects  of  the  same  thing,  having  a  relative  independence, 
and  exhibiting  Christianity  under  distinct  relations  of 
resemblance  or  contrast  to  other  forms  of  religion.  The 
four  types  may  be  described  by  these  titles:  The  Kingdom 
of  God,  The  Righteousness  of  God,  Free  Access  to  God, 
Eterncd  Life,  The  first  is  the  designation  under  which 
the  benefit  accruing  from  the  advent  of  Christ  appears 
in  the  synoptical  presentation  of  our  Lord's  teaching ; 
the  second  is  the  name  for  the  same  thing  found  in  the 
Pauline  Epistles ;  the  third  indicates  the  chosen  point  of 
view  of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews ;  the 
last  is  the  watchword  of  the  Fourth  Gospel.  We  are 
concerned  in  the  present  work  with  the  first  of  these 
four  types,  our  task  being  to  give  a  succinct  account 
of  the  teaching  of  Christ  as  recorded  in  the  first  three 
Gospels. 

The  doctrine  of  Christ  in  these  Gospels  is  the  doctrine 
of  the  kingdom  of  God.  Under  this  category  all  may  be 
ranged ;  there  is  no  other  entitled  to  be  placed  above  it, 
or  that  does  not  easily  find  a  place  under  it.  The  ethical 
teaching  of  Christ  is  very  important,  and  some  have 
given  it  the  first  place,  and  made  the  doctrine  of  the 
kingdom  subordinate  and  secondary.^  But  the  ethics  of 
Jesus  are  the  ethics  of  the  kingdom,  setting  forth  the 
laws  by  which  its  subjects  are  to  guide  their  lives.  The 
function  of  Christ  as  Eedeemer  is  a  still  more  important 
category,  and  it  might  seem  as  if  the  most  appropriate 
general  description  of  His  teaching  would  be  one  giving 
prominence,  as  He  did  Himself,  to  the  fact  that  He  came 
to  "  save  the  lost " — the  doctrine  of  salvation.  But  even 
^  So  Baiir,  in  Vorlesungen  iiher  neutcstamentliche  Theologie. 


CRITICAL  INTRODUCTION.  41 

this  heading  falls  naturally  under  the  doctrine  of  the 
kingdom.  The  doctrine  of  salvation  shows  the  way  by 
which  men  enter  into  the  kingdom.  Christianity  has 
been  described  as  being,  not  a  circle  with  one  centre,  but 
an  ellipse  with  two  foci ;  the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom 
being  one  of  the  foci,  the  doctrine  of  redemption  the 
other.  But  no  indignity  is  done  to  Christ's  redeeming 
work  by  including  it  as  a  particular  under  the  general 
head  of  the  kingdom ;  rather  is  its  fundamental  import- 
ance thereby  signalized.  No  higher  idea  can  be  formed 
of  salvation  than  to  make  it  consist  in  citizenship  in  the 
divine  commonwealth ;  nor  can  Christ's  importance  as 
Saviour  be  more  conspicuously  magnified  than  by  repre- 
senting Him  as  one  to  whom  citizens  owe  their  admission 
to  the  privilege.  I  have  no  hesitation,  therefore,  in 
regarding  the  kingdom  of  God  as  an  exhaustive  category. 


THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD; 

OR  CHRIST'S  TEACHING  ACCORDING  TO  THE 
SYNOPTICAL  GOSPELS. 


CHAPTER  L 

Christ's  idea  of  the  kingdom. 

The  Kingdom  of  God  :  what  did  Jesus  mean  by  that 
expression  ?  In  all  that  relates  to  the  significance  of 
Christianity,  two  tendencies  of  thought  have  ever  revealed 
themselves  in  the  Church  —  one  to  magnify  the  new 
element  in  it,  the  other  to  reduce  the  new  element  to  a 
minimum ;  on  the  one  hand,  to  emphasize  the  affinity  of 
the  Christian  religion  to  that  which  went  before  in  the 
history  of  revelation ;  on  the  other,  to  emphasize  the 
distinctness.  The  minimizing  tendency  has  ever  had  on 
its  side  the  majority.  It  has  its  representatives  among 
living  theologians  in  reference  to  the  question  now  before 
us.  The  most  recent  writer,  e.g.,  on  the  life  of  Jesus 
says  :  "  What  this  kingdom  is  Jesus  has  nowhere  expressly 
stated ;  He  treats  the  notion  as  one  current  among  the 
people.  It  is  therefore  quite  perverse  to  regard  it  as  an 
idea  invented  by  Jesus,  and  to  attempt  to  construct  it 


44  ,  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

out  of  His  sayings.  Historically  viewed,  Jesus  can  have 
meant  nothing  by  it  save  what  arose  naturally  out  of  the 
peculiarity  of  His  people  and  its  ways  of  thinking."  ^ 
I  should  be  very  much  surprised  as  well  as  disappointed 
if  this  were  true.  All  the  leading  writers  of  the  New 
Testament — Paul  and  the  authors  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews  and  the  Fourth  Gospel — betray  in  their  writings 
an  intense  consciousness  that  some  great  and  "new  thing 
had  come  into  the  world  through  the  mission  of  Christ. 
Paul  makes  Christ  the  bringer  in  of  a  new  creation. 
The  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  represents  the 
Christian  era  as  the  era  of  the  Better  Hope  through  which 
we  draw  nigh  to  God,  in  contrast  to  the  Levitical  religion 
which  kept  men  standing  at  an  awful  distance.  In  the 
Eourth  Gospel  the  distinction  between  the  new  and  the 
old  dispensations  is  broadly  indicated  by  the  declaration : 
"  The  law  was  given  by  Moses ;  grace  and  truth  came 
by  Jesus  Christ."  We  should  certainly  expect  to  find 
the  great  Initiator  not  behind  His  apostolic  interpreters 
in  insight  into  the  nature  and  ultimate  outcome  of  His 
mission.      Without   claiming   for   Him    omniscience,  we 

1  Weiss,  Leben  Jesti,  i.  444,  445  (vol.  ii.  pp.  65,  66,  Clark's  transla- 
tion). Students  of  the  works  of  tins  distinguished  theologian  must 
be  on  their  guard  against  his  bias  as  an  interpreter.  His  great  merits 
as  a  critic  may  lead  to  indiscriminate  discipleship  in  a  sphere  in 
which  he  is  weak  and  unsatisfactory.  His  great  fault,  or  at  least  one 
of  his  glaring  faults,  is  an  extreme  anti- Tubingen  bias,  a  tendency 
to  deny  the  very  fact-basis  of  the  Tubingen  theory,  reducing  all  to  a 
colourless  neutrality,  in  place  of  the  extreme  antagonisms  of  Baur. 
The  nniversalism  of  Jesus  is  grudgingly  admitted.  Even  that  of 
Paul  is  toned  down  ;  and  on  the  whole,  one  wonders  how  a  world- 
wide Christianity  ever  grew  up  out  of  such  beginnings,  the  initiators 
having  so  little  of  the  spirit  of  tlie  new  era. 


CHRIST  S  IDEA  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  45 

should  at  least  credit  Him  with  the  deep,  far-reaching 
spiritual  vision  of  a  unique  religious  genius.  This  is  also 
demanded  by  words  of  His  own,  of  indubitable  authen- 
ticity ;  such  as  those  which  represent  John  the  Baptist 
as  less  than  the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  and 
compare  the  movement  with  which  He  Himself  was 
identified  to  a  neiv  garment  and  a  new  vantage.  It  would 
require  some  great  epoch  -  making  novelty  in  religious 
thought  and  life  to  justify  such  utterances. 

It  is  true,  indeed,  the  name  employed  by  Jesus  for  the 
new  thing  is  old.  It  indicates  an  attitude  less  anta- 
gonistic to  the  earlier  rudimentary  forms  of  religion  than 
that  of  Paul,  who  is  consciously  and  intensely  opposed  to 
legalism,  and  of  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
who  is  earnestly  bent  on  asserting  and  evincing  under 
every  aspect  the  incomparable  superiority  of  Chris- 
tianity to  the  Levitical  religion.  It  expresses  affinity 
rather  than  antagonism,  introducing  a  new  world  with 
the  least  possible  shock  to  old  associations.  But  the 
choice  of  it  was  due  to  wisdom,  not  to  limitation  of  know- 
ledge. It  was  natural  and  suitable  at  the  initial  period 
of  the  new  age,  yet  fit  for  permanent  use.  It  was  not  a 
transient  name,  expressive  of  a  hope  that  was  destined 
to  prove  a  dream — a  restored  theocratic  kingdom  of 
Israel,  cherished  by  one  who  was  under  the  influence  of 
the  old  world  that  was  about  to  pass  away.  It  was  a 
felicitous  suggestive  name  for  the  blessing  of  the  New 
Testament,  used  with  full  consciousness  of  its  significance, 
expressive  of  eternal  truth,  and  to  be  reverted  to  through- 
out the  Christian  ages  for  instruction  and  inspiration. 

Nothing   can   be   at   once   more   necessary  and   more 


46  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

legitimate  than  the  endeavour  to  ascertain  by  a  close 
study  of  Christ's  words  and  actions  in  what  sense  He 
used  this  title.  It  is  necessary,  for  the  title  in  itself  is  a 
form  capable  of  much  meaning,  but  expressly  conveyiug 
little.  It  signifies  some  form  of  divine  dominion.  Ab- 
stractly viewed,  it  might  denote  the  reign  of  the  Almighty 
over  all  creation  through  the  operation  of  natural  law  ;  or 
of  the  moral  Governor  of  the  world  rendering  to  every 
man  and  nation  according  to  their  works ;  or  of  the  God 
of  Israel  ruling  over  a  chosen  people,  and  bestowing  on 
them  power,  peace,  and  felicity  as  the  reward  of  obedience 
to  His  divine  will.  Or  it  might  mean  something  higher 
than  any  of  these  things,  the  highest  form  of  dominion 
conceivable,  the  advent  of  which  is  emphatically  fit  tg  be 
the  burden  of  a  gospel,  viz.  the  reign  of  divine  love 
exercised  by  God  in  His  grace  over  human  hearts  believ- 
ing in  His  love,  and  constrained  thereby  to  yield  Him 
grateful  affection  and  devoted  service.  Which  of  all  these 
was  present  to  Christ's  mind  can  be  ascertained  only  by 
a  study  of  His  words  and  deeds.  The  first  two  are 
excluded  by  the  simple  consideration  that  the  kingdom 
Christ  proclaimed  was  represented  by  Him  as  coming. 
They  do  not  come ;  they  are  always  here  and  everywhere 
in  all  possible  fulness.  The  choice  lies  between  the  other 
two,  which  are  subject  to  the  law  of  growth.  The  theo- 
cratic kingdom  comes  as  Israel  becomes  a  righteous 
nation,  and  grows  proportionally  prosperous.  The  king- 
dom of  grace  comes  as  men  open  their  hearts  to  the 
])enignant  love  of  God,  and  experience  in  increasing 
measure  its  peace-giving,  renewing  influence.  Which  of 
these,  then,  was  it  whose   approach  Jesus   proclaimed  ? 


CHRIST'S  IDEA  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  47 

We  must  search  the  Gospels  to  determine.  As  either 
alternative  is  possible,  the  question  is  not  to  be  settled 
by  offhand  assumptions.  It  may  be  that  Jesus  had  in 
view,  at  least  in  the  early  period  of  His  ministry,  simply 
the  theocratic  kingdom  of  Hebrew  prophecy  and  popular 
expectation, — a  politico-ethical  commonwealth,  differing 
from  the  multitude  only  in  placing  the  ethical  element 
before  the  political  as  its  indispensable  condition  ;  but  the 
mere  use  of  the  expression  "  the  kingdom  of  God  "  is  no 
proof  of  this.  The  only  legitimate  and  satisfactory  course 
is  to  try  to  ascertain  which  hypothesis  fits  best  into  the 
particular  statements  and  general  drift  of  the  evangelic 
history. 

Our  Lord  is  represented  as  opening  His  ministry 
with  the  announcement,  "  The  time  is  fulfilled,  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand."^  The  fact  seems  to  favour 
what  we  may  call  the  Judaizing  hypothesis.  The  "  time  " 
referred  to,  it  is  natural  to  suppose,  is  Israel's  time  of 
merciful  visitation,  and  the  "  kingdom "  the  realization 
of  Israel's  hope  as  depicted  by  the  prophets.  But  even 
on  this  view  the  question  at  issue  is  not  settled.  For, 
on  any  hypothesis,  Israel  had  a  vital  and  prior  interest 
in  the  kingdom  now  declared  to  be  at  hand ;  and  as  for 
the  prophetic  ideal  of  the  kingdom,  it  is  not  quite  so 
simple  a  matter  to  determine  as  one  may  at  first  be 
inclined  to  think.  The  general  strain  of  Hebrew 
prophecy  seems  indeed  to  point  to  such  a  state  of 
things  as  Zacharias  longed  for:  Israel  delivered  out  of 
the  hands  of  her  enemies,  and  serving  God  without  fear, 
and  amid  prevalent  prosperity.^  Yet  there  are  stray 
1  Mark  i.  15.  2  L^^j^e  i.  74. 


48  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

utterances  here  and  there  which  suggest  the  doubt 
whether  this  idyllic  picture  was  ever  to  find  a  place 
in  the  realm  of  reality.  There  is,  e.g.,  the  ominous  word, 
uttered  towards  the  close  of  the  prophetic  period,  which 
not  obscurely  hints  that  God's  kingdom  might  come  not 
merely  so  as  not  to  be  the  monopoly  of  Israel,  but  even 
so  as  to  involve  for  her  a  doom  of  reprobation.  The 
prophet  Malachi  represents  Jehovah,  in  disgust  at  the 
Pharisaical,  heartless  service  of  an  ungodly  race,  exclaim- 
ing :  "  Oh  that  some  one  would  shut  the  temple  doors, 
that  ye  may  no  more  kindle  in  vain  a  fire  upon  Mine 
altar ; "  and  declaring,  "  for  from  the  rising  of  the  sun, 
even  unto  the  going  down  of  the  same.  My  name  shall  be 
great  among  the  Gentiles ;  and  in  every  place  incense 
shall  be  offered  unto  My  name,  and  a  pure  offering  :  for 
My  name  shall  be  great  among  the  heathen,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts."  ^  Here  it  is  no  more  all  the  nations 
coming  to  Jerusalem  with  gold  and  incense  in  their 
hands,  as  in  Isaiah's  bright  vision,^  but  the  temple  shut 
up  and  forsaken,  and  an  acceptable  worship  offered  to 
God  in  every  place  where  human  souls  are  found  worship- 
ping the  true  God  in  spirit  and  in  truth.  Those  who, 
like  the  father  of  the  Baptist,  waited  for  the  consolation 
of  Israel  in  Christ's  time,  might  overlook  such  passages, 
but  we  are  not  to  suppose  that  Christ  Himself  was  blind 
to  them.  He  had  an  eye  for  overlooked  texts,  a  mind 
that  could  appreciate  forgotten  or  neglected  truths,  a 
spiritual  insight  that  could  discern  the  undercurrents  of 

1  Mai.  i.  10.     The  rendering  in  the  Authorized  Version  makes  the 
text  contain  a  charge  of  mercenariness  against  the  priests. 

2  Isa.  Ix. 


CHRIST'S  IDEA  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  49 

prophetic  thought.  Withal  He  was  a  most  original 
interpreter;  this  we  must  ever  remember  if  we  would 
understand  His  teaching.  He  was,  to  an  inestimable 
extent,  original  in  every  way.  He  was  original  as  a 
thinker  and  actor,  not  the  mere  creature  of  historical 
development.  He  was  likewise  original  as  an  exegete 
and  as  a  fulfiller  of  Scripture.  He  was  not  the  slave  of 
Old  Testament  texts,  which  it  was  His  official  duty  as 
Messiah  to  fulfil.  He  brought  out  of  His  treasure  things 
new  as  well  as  old ;  He  spiritualized,  idealized  the  utter- 
ances of  the  prophets,  and  He  fulfilled  them  by  filling 
them  full  to  overflowing,  bringing  to  the  world  in  Him- 
self and  His  teaching  more  than  it  is  possible  to  find  in 
all  Old  Testament  prophecies  put  together,  apart  from  the 
light  shed  on  them  by  the  gospel  history. 

Many  things  in  that  history  point  to  the  deeper 
mystic  sense  of  the  phrase  now  under  consideration  as 
the  true  one.  Some  of  these  can  conveniently  be  men- 
tioned here. 

Eirst,  there  is  the  very  term  "  mystery "  applied  by 

Jesus  to  the  kingdom  in  explaining  to  His  disciples  the 

parable  of  the  Sower.     "  A  mystery,"  it  has  been  well 

remarked,  "  is  a  truth  revealed  for  the  first  time  by  Jesus 

only,  and  by  the  Spirit  of  God  who  continues  His  work, 

and  unknown  to  previous  generations :  we  see,  then,  by 

that  very  term,  that  the  idea  which  presents  itself  to  our 

study  will  contain  characters  absolutely  new,  and  which 

it  will  require  special  instruction  to  enable  us  to  seize 

and   comprehend."  ^       The     comparison    of    the    scribe 

instructed    in  the  things  of  the  kingdom    to    a    house- 

1  Keuss,  Theologie  Ghretienne,  i.  174. 
D 


50  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

holder  who  bringeth  out  of  his  treasure  things  new  and 
old,  points  in  the  same  direction.  The  parable,  a  familiar 
story  of  natural  life,  is  the  old ;  the  new  is  a  truth 
relating  to  the  kingdom  which  the  parable  embodies. 

The  expression  "  the  kingdom  of  grace,"  so  familiar  to 
us,  nowhere  occurs  in  the  Gospels,  and  even  the  word 
"  grace "  (%a/3t9)  in  the  Pauline  sense  is  of  rare  occur- 
rence. The  latter  is,  however,  found  once  in  Luke,  in 
his  account  of  Christ's  preaching  in  the  synagogue  of 
Nazareth,  where  it  is  said :  "  All  bare  Him  witness,  and 
wondered  at  the  words  of  grace  ^  which  proceeded  out  of 
His  mouth."  ^  The  reference  is  to  the  substance  of  the 
discourse,  not  to  its  manner.  We  can  well  believe  that 
there  was  a  peculiar  charm  in  the  speaker's  manner,  but 
it  sprang  from  His  heart  being  filled  with  enthusiasm  for 
the  mission  on  which  He  had  been  sent.  The  grace  of 
manner  had  its  source  in  the  grace  that  lay  in  the 
message.  He  had  come  to  preach  the  gospel  to  the 
poor,  to  heal  the  broken-hearted,  to  proclaim  the  accept- 
able year  of  the  Lord.  The  words  of  the  prophet  quoted 
and  descanted  on  take  us  involuntarily  into  a  higher 
region  than  a  restored  theocratic  kingdom  of  Israel. 
There  can  be  no  doubt  how  the  evangelist  regarded 
them,  and  in  what  sense  he  called  them  "  words  of  grace." 
He  has  taken  the  scene  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth  out 
of  its  true  historical  place,  and  set  it  in  the  forefront  of 
his  Gospel,  to  signify  that  the  mission  of  Jesus  concerned 
men's  souls,  and  that  it  concerned  all  men.  That  scene, 
as  it  stands  there,  stamps  Christ's  whole  ministry  with 
the  attributes  of  spirituality  and  universality,  proclaims 

2  Luke  iv.  22. 


CHRIST'S  IDEA  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  51 

it  to  be  throughout  a  ministry  of  love  to  all  the  sinful, 
sorrowful  sons  of  men.  True,  the  evangelist's  thought  is 
not  necessarily  the  thought  of  Jesus ;  and  in  transferring 
that  scene  from  its  true  place,  late  in  the  evangelic 
history,  he  may  be  conveying  a  false  impression  as  to  the 
views  and  hopes  with  which  the  Herald  of  the  kingdom 
hegan  His  ministry.  But  the  presumption,  to  say  the 
least,  is  the  other  way.  The  frontispiece  of  Luke's 
Gospel  makes  for  the  hypothesis  that  the  doctrine  of  the 
kingdom  from  the  first  moved  on  a  higher  plane  than 
that  of  vulgar  expectation.^ 

The  nature  of  Christ's  preaching  may  be  inferred  from 
the  effect  of  it  on  the  minds  of  those  who  welcomed  it. 
The  disciples  of  Jesus  conducted  themselves  as  men  who 
had  received  good  news.  They  fasted  not,  they  resembled 
rather  a  bridal  party  going  to  a  wedding  feast,  according 
to  the  testimony  of  their  own  Master.  Did  their  joy 
spring  from  the  hope  that  the  theocratic  kingdom  was 
about  to  be  restored  to  Israel,  and  unrighteousness, 
misery,  and  the  Eomans  expelled  from  the  Holy  Land  ? 
In  that  case  we  should  have  expected  the  disciples  of  the 
Baptist  to  share  the  joy,  for  their  thoughts  admittedly 
ran  in  that  direction.  But  they  did  not:  it  was  the 
marked  difference  in  habit  and  temper  between  the  two 
discipleships  that  gave  Jesus  occasion  to  make  the 
striking  comparison  of  His  own  disciples  to  a  bridal 
party.  Whence  this  difference  ?  Why  were  the 
followers  of  Jesus  like  people  going  to  a  wedding,  and 

1  The  scene  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth  has  the  same  typical 
significance  in  Luke's  Gospel  that  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  has  in 
Matthew's.     On  this  point,  see  my  Galilean  Gospel. 


52  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  followers  of  John  like  a  band  of  pilgrims  faring 
towards  a  holy  place,  doing  penance  for  their  sins  ?  It 
must  have  sprung  from  totally  diverse  conceptions  of  the 
kingdom  whose  approach  both  Masters  proclaimed, 
imbibed  from  the  teaching  of  those  Masters.  Jesus  and 
John  used  much  the  same  form  of  words,  but  they  can- 
not have  meant  the  same  thing.  We  know  what  John 
meant  when  he  spoke  of  the  kingdom.  He  meant  the 
people  of  Israel  converted  to  righteousness,  and  in  conse- 
quence blessed  with  national  prosperity.  And  that  being 
his  ideal  and  aim,  he  was  a  gloomy  man,  and  those  who 
were  about  him  became  infected  with  his  gloom.  For 
he  saw  too  soon  and  too  well  that  the  conversion  of 
Israel  to  righteousness  was  a  very  improbable  event. 
And  so,  despairing  of  the  nation,  and  hoping  only  for 
the  salvation  of  a  small  remnant,  he  began  to  talk  of  a 
winnowing-fan  to  separate  wheat  from  chaff,  and  of  an 
axe  of  judgment  to  hew  down  the  worthless  tree.  In  the 
mouth  of  one  in  this  grim,  desponding  mood,  the  announce- 
ment of  the  approaching  kingdom  was  a  message  of  doom 
rather  than  of  hope ;  it  was  awful  tidings  rather  than 
good  tidings,  for  the  greater  number  at  least,  and  indeed 
for  all ;  for  who  could  tell  who  should  be  able  to  stand 
the  King's  keen  scrutiny,  "  who  may  abide  the  day  of 
His  coming  ? "  All  one  could  do  was  to  labour  painfully 
at  self-reformation,  fasting,  praying,  scrupulously  cleansing 
body  and  soul,  humbly  trusting  he  might  have  a  chance 
of  standing  at  Jehovah's  dread  appearing.  From  the  joy 
of  Christ's  disciples,  w^e  infer  that  He  meant  something 
different.  He  did  not  expect  national  repentance,  though 
He  desired  it,  and  faithfully  worked  for  it ;  therefore  He 


Christ's  idea  of  the  kingdom.  53 

never  despaired.  He  did  not  come  merely  making  a  legal 
demand,  and  commanding  men  to  be  righteous  under 
penalties.  He  came  as  one  conscious  that  he  had  a 
message  to  proclaim  that  would  help  men  to  be  good  and 
happy.  Therefore  He  was  glad  and  hopeful,  and  all  who 
came  near  Him  felt  His  presence  as  a  warm  summer 
sun. 

Another  significant  indication  of  the  nature  of  the 
kingdom  Jesus  preached  may  be  found  in  the  kind  of 
people  to  whom  He  principally  and  by  preference 
addressed  His  invitations  to  enter.  He  preached  the 
gospel  of  the  kingdom  to  the  poor ;  ^  He  defined  His 
mission  by  such  sayings  as  these :  "  I  am  not  come  to 
call  the  righteous,  but  sinners  ; "  ^  "  the  Son  of  Man  is 
come  to  seek  and  to  save  the  lost."  ^  He  threw  the  gates 
of  the  kingdom  open  to  all  comers  irrespective  of  ante- 
cedent character,  even  if  they  had  been  really  as  bad 
as  the  Pharisees  deemed  those  whom  they  branded  as 
"  publicans  and  sinners."  Many  morally  disreputable 
persons  responded  to  His  call.  This  fact  was  in  His 
view  when  He  uttered  the  remarkable  saying :  "  From  the 
days  of  John  the  Baptist  until  now  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  suffereth  violence,  and  the  violent  take  it  by 
force."  ^  Publicans,  sinners,  harlots,  the  moral  refuse  of 
society, — such  were  the  persons  who  in  greatest  numbers 
and  with  greatest  earnestness  pressed  into  the  kingdom, — 

1  Matt.  xi.  5.  2  ]\jatt.  ix.  13.  ^  L^^^e  xix.  10. 

■*  Matt.  xi.  12.  Some  take  the  statement  in  a  bad  sense,  as  im- 
plying that  the  people  were  seeking  the  kingdom  in  a  worldly- 
spirit,  bent  on  setting  up  a  political  kingdom,  irrrespective  of 
ethical  conditions.  This  view  is  unsuitable  to  the  connection  of 
thought. 


54  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

a  plienomenon  astonishing  to  reputable,  "righteous," 
religious  people.  The  kingdom  of  God  was  being  made 
a  cave  of  AduUam,  whither  every  one  that  was  in  distress 
or  deep  in  moral  debt  resorted.  The  city  of  God  was 
being  taken  possession  of  by  "  dogs,"  whose  proper  place 
was  without ;  it  was,  as  it  were,  being  stormed  by  rude, 
lawless  bands,  and  taken  from  those  who  thought  they 
had  an  exclusive  right  to  it.  What  a  violence  !  what  a 
profanation  !  Perhaps  so  ;  but  one  thing  is  clear :  those 
persons  who  by  their  passionate  earnestness  were  storming 
the  kingdom  would  not  suppose  that  theij  had  any  right  to 
it.  They  listened  to  Christ's  call,  because  they  gathered 
from  His  preaching  that  the  kingdom  was  a  gift  of  grace, 
meant,  in  fact,  God's  sovereign,  unmerited  love  to 
unworthy  men,  blessing  them  with  pardon,  and  so  gaining 
power  over  their  hearts.  And  they  felt  that  it  did  gain 
power,  and  that  the  dominion  was  real.  Forgiven  much, 
they  loved  much.  Christ  also  was  aware  of  the  fact,  and 
that  was  one  of  His  reasons  for  seeking  citizens  of  the 
kingdom  in  such  a  quarter ;  and  that  He  did  seek  them 
there,  for  such  a  reason,  shows  very  plainly  what  His 
idea  of  the  kingdom  was  :  a  kingdom  of  grace  in  order  to 
he  a  kingdom  of  holiness. 

The  attitude  of  Jesus  towards  the  social  abjects  is  in 
many  ways  significant.  It  implies,  as  we  shall  see,  a  new 
idea  of  man ;  but  what  I  wish  now  to  point  out  is  the 
tendency  it  indicates  towards  imiversalism.  This  part  of 
Christ's  public  action,  as  the  records  show,  created  much 
surprise,  and  provoked  frequent  censure.  This  is  not  to 
be  wondered  at.  It  really  meant  an  incipient  religious 
revolution.      It  manifested  a  disregard  for  conventional 


cheist's  idea  of  the  kingdom.  55 

social  distinctions,  involving  a  principle  which  might  one 
day  be  applied  on  a  much  wider  scale,  in  the  form,  viz., 
of  a  disregard  of  distinctions  not  merely  between  classes 
within  the  bounds  of  the  chosen  people,  but  between 
races  and  nations  ;  Jew  and  Gentile  being  treated  as  one, 
both  needing  salvation,  neither  having  any  claim  to  it, 
and  the  Gentile  being  not  less  capable  of  it  than  the  Jew. 
In  maintaining  sympathetic  relations  with  the  "  publicans 
and  sinners,"  Jesus  said  in  effect :  "  The  kingdom  is  for 
them  too ;  it  is  for  all  who  need  it  and  make  it  welcome. 
It  opens  its  gates,  like  ancient  Eome,  to  all  comers,  on 
condition  that  they  conduct  themselves  as  good  citizens, 
once  they  are  within  its  walls.  From  east,  west,  north, 
south,  let  them  come ;  they  shall  not  be  refused  admit- 
tance." The  jealous  guardians  of  Jewish  prerogative  did 
well,  therefore,  to  take  alarm  at  this  novel  interest  in  the 
lost  sheep  of  Israel,  whom  they  themselves  had  abandoned 
to  their  fate. 

The  universalis  tic  drift  revealed  in  Christ's  love  for 
the  low  and  lowly  found  expression  in  many  of  His  ivords. 
I  refer  to  such  as  these :  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the 
earth  ;  "  "  ye  are  the  light  of  the  world  ;  "  "  the  field  is  the 
world."  ^  The  human  race  is  regarded  as  the  subject  of 
the  salting  and  enlightening  influence  of  the  children  of 
the  kingdom,  and  the  field  to  be  sown  with  the  word  of 
the  kingdom ;  so  that  we  are  not  surprised  to  find  one 

^  Of  course  it  is  open  to  criticism  to  raise  doubts  as  to  the 
genuineness  of  such  sayings.  Weiss  thinks  the  interpretation  of  the 
parable  of  the  Tares,  in  which  the  last  of  the  above  sayings  occurs 
(Matt.  xiii.  38),  does  not  proceed  from  Christ ;  and  one  of  his  argu- 
ments is,  that  He  could  not  have  said  so  absolutely  "  the  field  is  the 
world."     Vide  his  Alatthaus-Evangelium,  in  loc. 


56  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Gospel  closing  with  the  injunction  from  the  Master  to 
His  disciples  :  "  Go  ye  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations  ; " 
and  another  with  a  similar  command :  "  Go  ye  into  all 
the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole  creation." 
There  is  a  width  of  horizon  in  such  utterances  that  is 
totally  irreconcilable  with  the  hypothesis  that  Jesus  was 
merely  a  patriotic  Jew,  whose  sympathies  as  well  as  His 
work  were  confined  to  His  countrymen,  and  whose  aim 
was  to  make  Israel  first  a  righteous  nation,  and  then  a 
free,  prosperous  kingdom. 

But  we  may  be  reminded  that  there  are  things  in  the 
Gospels  pointing  in  a  contrary  direction,  which  imply 
either  that  Christ's  teaching  and  action  were  not  self- 
consistent,  or  that  the  evangelists  do  not  give  us  a 
reliable  record  of  His  ministry.  They  are  such  as  these : 
the  refusal  of  Jesus  to  grant  the  prayer  of  the  woman  of 
Canaan,  on  the  ground  that  His  mission  was  to  Israel ; 
the  exclusion  of  Samaria  from  the  sphere  of  the  mission 
on  which  the  twelve  were  sent ;  and  such  apparently 
contemptuous  expressions  towards  pagans  as  those  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount :  "  When  ye  pray,  use  not  vain 
repetitions  as  the  heathen  do,"  "  after  all  these  things 
do  the  Gentiles  seek ; "  the  still  more  offensive  term 
"  dogs  "  employed  with  the  same  reference  in  the  inter- 
view with  the  Syro-Phoenician  ;  and  the  direction  given  to 
the  future  ministers  of  the  kingdom  to  treat  an  obstinately 
impenitent  offender  "  as  an  heathen  man  and  a  publican." 
It  is  not  a  very  formidable  array  of  counter-evidence. 
When  Jesus  said :  "  I  am  not  sent  save  to  the  lost  sheep 
of  the  house  of  Israel,"  He  did  certainly  speak  seriously. 
He  did  regard  Himself,  in   His  individual  capacity,  as 


cueist's  idea  of  the  kingdom.  57 

a  messenger  of  God  to  the  Jewish  nation  exclusively, 
unless  when  good  cause  could  be  shown  for  making  an 
exception.  But  that  is  a  very  different  thing  from 
regarding  the  kingdom  of  God,  in  its  essential  nature 
and  ultimate  destination,  as  a  matter  in  which  Jews 
alone  had  any  interest.  Assuming  that  the  kingdom 
was  destined  to  universality,  it  might  still  be  the  wisest 
method  for  founding  a  universal,  spiritual  monarchy  to 
begin  by  securing  a  footing  within  the  boundaries  of  the 
elect  people ;  and  that  could  be  done  only  by  one  who 
devoted  his  whole  mind  to  it,  determined  not  to  be 
turned  aside  by  outside  opportunities,  however  tempting, 
or  by  random  sympathies,  however  keen,  with  sin  and 
misery,  beyond  the  Jewish  pale.  The  utterance  in  ques- 
tion only  shows  the  thoroughly  disciplined  spirit  of  Jesus 
in  abiding  at  His  own  appointed  post.  As  He  was 
willing  to  be  the  corn  of  wheat  cast  into  the  ground  to 
die,  that  through  death  there  might  be  great  increase,  so 
He  was  willing  to  be  God's  minister  to  the  Jews,  as  the 
best  preparation  for  a  future  ministry  among  the  Gentiles. 
The  other  particulars  above  referred  to  hardly  need 
explanation.  The  direction  given  to  the  disciples  not 
to  go  to  the  Samaritans  is  sufficiently  explained  by  their 
spiritual  immaturity.  The  two  allusions  to  pagan  prac- 
tice in  prayer  have  no  animus  in  them :  they  are  simple 
statements  of  fact  brought  in  to  illustrate  the  speaker's 
meaning.  There  is  certainly  an  animus  in  the  term 
"  dogs,"  but  it  is  not  an  animus  of  hatred.  It  was  used 
to  experiment  on  the  spirit  of  the  person  addressed. 
One  who  really  hated  the  Gentiles  would  neither  have 
taken  the  trouble  to  make  -the  experiment,  nor  been  so 


58  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

gratified  with  the  result.  As  for  the  saying  last  quoted, 
the  possibility  of  misapprehension  is  precluded  by  the 
familiar  facts  of  Christ's  personal  history.  We  know 
what  the  publicans  were  to  Him ;  and  if  He  felt  towards 
the  heathen  in  like  manner,  they  were  to  Him  objects 
not  of  aversion  or  contempt,  but  of  humane,  yearning 
compassion. 

One  fact  more  I  mention,  as  surely  indicating  the 
spiritual  character  of  the  kingdom  Jesus  preached.  It 
is  the  alternative  name  for  the  kingdom  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  first  Gospel.  Mark  and  Luke  call  it 
the  kingdom  of  God.  Matthew  almost  uniformly  calls 
it  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  The  expression  suggests  the 
thought  that  the  kingdom  is  an  ideal  hovering  over  all 
actual  societies,  civil  or  sacred,  like  Plato's  Eepublic,  to 
be  found  realized  in  perfection  nowhere  on  this  earth, 
the  true  home  of  which  is  in  the  supersensible  world. ^ 
In  all  probability,  the  title  was  used  alternatively  by 
Jesus  for  the  express  purpose  of  lifting  the  minds  of  the 
Jewish  people  into  a  higher  region  of  thought  than  that 
in  which  their  present  hopes  as  members  of  the  theocratic 
nation  moved ;  just  as,  in  addressing  censors  of  His  con- 
duct in  associating  with  publicans  and  sinners.  He  spoke 
of  the  joy  in  heaven  over  a  sinner  repenting  to  gain  an 
entrance  into  their  minds  for  the  conception  of  a  love  in 
His  own  heart  whereof  as  yet  they  had  not  so  much  as 
dreamed.  There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  phrase 
belonged  to  the  vocabulary  of  Jesus,  though  a  writer 
already  quoted  confidently  affirms  that  it  cannot  have 
belonged  to  the  apostolic  tradition,  in  other  words,  was 

^  SoBaur. 


cheist's  idea  of  the  kingdom.  59 

not  employed  by  Christ.^  The  opinion  carries  no  weight, 
for  it  is  a  mere  assertion,  but  it  is  very  interesting  as 
an  indirect  testimony  on  the  part  of  its  author  that  the 
designation  in  question  does  not  fit  well  into  his  theory 
as  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom  Jesus  proposed  to 
found.  The  argjument  is :  "  The  kingdom  was  to  be 
the  fulfilment  of  theocratic  hopes,  therefore  it  cannot 
have  been  called  by  Jesas  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  That 
name  must  have  come  in  when  the  hope  of  a  restored 
kingdom  of  Israel  was  seen  to  be  a  dream."  Strange 
that  this  unhistorical  name  should  occur  in  the  first 
Gospel,  the  most  theocratic  of  all  the  four ! 

It  would  be  a  mistake  to  suppose  that,  in  using  this 
name,  Jesus  meant  to  banish  the  kingdom  from  earth  to 
the  skies,  from  this  present  life  to  the  future  world. 
As  He  presented  it,  it  was  very  lofty  in  nature,  yet 
near  men,  yea  in  their  very  hearts ;  there  if  anywhere. 
It  concerned  men  here  and  now ;  all  men  eventually, 
Israelites  in  the  first  place,  as  they  were  the  people  of 
the  old  election,  and  the  Herald  of  the  kingdom  was 
their  countryman.      It  was  to  become  a  society  on  earth, 

1  Weiss,  Lehrhuch  der  Bihlischen  Theologie  des  Neuen  Testaments^  S. 
47.  Jost,  Geschichte  des  Jiidenthums,  i.  397,  says  that  what  tlie  wise 
in  Israel  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  aimed  at  was  simply  the  highest 
piety  of  life,  the  union  in  modes  of  feeling  and  action  which  was 
called  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  though  they  did  not  express  their 
meaning  clearly  ;  and  that  Eabbinical  expressions  concerning  the 
so-called  King  Messiah  were  all  of  later  date.  If  this  view  be 
correct,  the  phrase  "the  kingdom  of  heaven"  was  current  then, 
and  had  a  purely  ethical  or  spiritual  meaning.  Jost  represents  the 
"kingdom  of  heaven"  of  Jewish  theology  as  a  refuge  to  the  devout 
from  the  degradation  of  the  temple  -  worship  by  unworthy  high 
priests,  and  from  the  bondage  under  which  the  people  sighed,  and 
as  such  as  a  pioneer  to  Christianity. 


60  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

ever  widening  in  extent,  for  a  kingdom  is  a  social  thing ; 
it  could  not  fail  to  become  such  if  it  met  with  any 
reception  from  those  to  whom  it  was  proclaimed,  for 
the  spirit  of  the  kingdom  is  love,  and  impels  to  fellow- 
ship. It  was  the  highest  good  of  life,  the  hidden  treasure 
which  men  should  willingly  buy  with  all  their  possessions, 
the  precious  pearl  for  which  all  else  should  be  gladly 
exchanged.  It  was  accessible  to  all :  to  the  poor,  the 
hungry,  the  weeping,  the  social  outcasts,  and  the  depraved  ; 
not  to  them  exclusively,  but  to  them  very  specially,  as 
most  needing  its  blessings  and  most  likely  to  welcome 
them.  It  was  spiritual.  The  conditions  of  admission, 
the  sole  conditions  so  far  as  appears,  and  as  I  shall 
hereafter  try  to  prove,  were  repentance  and  faith,  or  in 
one  word  receptivity — readiness  to  make  the  kingdom 
welcome.  It  was  associated  with,  may  almost  be  said 
to  have  consisted  in,  a  certain  doctrine  of  God,  and  a 
kindred  doctrine  of  man.  "  Briefly  stated,  the  religious 
lieaven  of  Jesus  meant  the  Fatherliness  of  God  for  men, 
the  sonship  of  men  for  God,  and  the  infinite  spiritual 
good  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  Fatherhood  and  Son- 
ship."  ^  It_was  all  this  from  the  beoinninoLoL-Christ's 
ministry.  Jesus  did  not  begin  to  cherish  and  utter 
these  gracious,  spiritual,  universal  thoughts  in  the  later 
sorrowful  days  of  His  public  ministry,  after  painful 
experience  had  taught  Him  that  the  aim  with  which 
He  started  was  a  generous  patriotic  delusion.  The 
career  He  ran  was  not  this :  The  Nazarene  prophet  goes 
forth  from  His  home  full  of  youthful  enthusiasm,  bent 
on  realizing  the  hope  which  prophecy  had  nursed,  with 
^  Keim,  Geschichte  Jesu  von  Nazara^  54. 


Christ's  idea  of  the  kingdom.  61 

this  as  His  watchword  and  programme — first,  the  kino-- 
dom   of    God   and    His    righteousness ;    next,   food   and 
raiment,  or  in  one  word,  prosperity.     First  a  righteous 
nation,  then  a  people  free  and  happy.     He  goes  about 
preaching  the   approach  of   the   kingdom  in  this  sense, 
and  dispensing  benefits  especially  to  the  poor  and  the 
sick  with  Messianic  bountif  ulness.     The  people,  especially 
in  the  northern  province,  receive  Him  and  His  doctrine 
and  His  benefits  with  enthusiasm.     They  welcome  the 
kingdom,   and   they   hail    Him   King.      But   their   pro- 
gramme  is   not   His ;  it  is  His  inverted.     They  desire 
political  independence  and  temporal  well-being  first  and 
unconditionally,  and  as  much   righteousness   as   can   be 
made  forthcoming  after  that.     This  once  made  manifest, 
at  the  Capernaum  crisis,  Jesus  enters  emphatic  dissent, 
and  the  charm  is  gone.     The  multitude  melts  away ;  and 
the  eyes  of  Jesus  are  opened.     It  is  all  over  with  the 
dream  of  a  theocratic  kingdom  of  Israel  wdth  Himself 
for  its  King.     What  awaits  Him,  He  now  sees,  is  not  a 
throne  but  a  cross.     If  He  is  to  have  a  kingdom,  it  must 
be  one  of  a  different  sort.     He  seeks  it  meantime  with 
sad  heart  in  the  formation  of  a  separate  society  gathered 
out  of  Israel ;  and  gradually  His  mind  opens  up  to  the 
great    inspiring    thought   of    spiritual    dominion,   gained 
through  death    over   human  hearts,  not  in  Judea  only, 
but  in  all  lands.^     Far  other  was  the  actual  course  of 
Christ's  history.     His  greatest  thoughts  were  present  to 
His  mind,  in  germ  at  least,  from  the  first,  though  they 
underwent  development  in  correspondence  with  outward 

1  This  is  substantially  tlie  scheme  worked  out  by  Weiss  in  his 
Leben  Jesu.     It  involves  new  interpretations  of  many  texts. 


62  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

events.  He  had  a  spiritual,  universal  kingdom  in  view 
the  day  He  preached  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  as  the 
opening  sentences  clearly  show.  He  expected  a  tragic 
end  at  the  time  when  He  defended  His  disciples  for  the 
neglect  of  fasting.  If  it  seem  unnatural  that  one  capable 
of  entertaining  such  wide-ranging  ideas,  and  visited  with 
such  gloomy  forebodings,  should  devote  Himself  with 
singleness  of  heart  to  the  limited  and  also  thankless  task 
of  the  regeneration  of  Israel,  it  will  be  well  to  remember 
that  Hebrew  prophets  had  done  much  the  same  thing. 
Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  went  forth  in  God's  name  to  preach 
to  their  countrymen  righteousness,  with  small  hope  of 
bringing  them  to  repentance ;  nevertheless  they  did 
their  duty  faithfully  and  nobly,  at  all  hazards  to  them- 
selves, as  their  recorded  prophecies  amply  attest. 


CHAPTEE  II. 

CHRIST'S  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  THE  MOSAIC  LAW. 

The  first  impression  produced  by  a  perusal  of  the 
Evangelic  records  with  reference  to  this  topic,  is  one  of 
surprise  at  the  reticence  of  Christ  regarding  a  subject  of 
such  importance.  We  might  have  expected  Him  to  say 
distinctly  whether  Jewish  law  and  custom  were  to 
prevail  in  the  kingdom  that  was  coming  ;  whether,  e.g., 
the  rite  of  circumcision  was  or  was  not  to  be  observed 
in  the  new  era.  Yet  throughout  the  whole  range  of  His 
utterances,  as  recorded  in  the  Synoptical  Gospels,  Jesus 
does  not  once  mention  circumcision. 

While  maintaining  silence  regarding  that  particular 
rite  of  fundamental  importance  in  the  old  covenant, 
Jesus  on  one  or  two  occasions  expressed  Himself  in 
general  terms  concerning  His  relation  to  the  Mosaic  Law, 
and  that  in  a  manner  which  does  not  seem  to  harmonize 
with  the  idea  of  the  kingdom  sketched  in  the  last 
chapter.  The  chief  of  these  utterances  is  the  well-known 
passage  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  in  which  the 
Preacher  declares  that  He  is  come,  not  to  do  away  with 
the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  but  rather  to  fulfil  them. 
He  speaks  as  if  He  were  conscious  that  an  opposite  role 
would   be   expected   of    Him,   and    desired   as   early   as 

63 


64  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

possible  to  correct  the  misapprehension.  "  Think  not  I 
came  to  destroy."  With  solemn  emphasis  He  goes  on  to 
affirm  that  while  heaven  and  earth  last,  the  minutest 
particle  of  the  law  shall  remain  valid,  till  all  things  be 
accomplished.  Then,  as  if  to  ensure  for  the  declaration 
a  permanent  lodgment  in  the  minds  of  His  hearers,  He 
asserts  the  inferiority  of  the  destroyer  of  any  existing 
laws,  however  unimportant,  to  the  man  who  inculcates 
and  keeps  the  laws  great  and  small;  and  the  little 
esteem  in  which  the  one  is  held  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  in  comparison  with  the  other.^  The  whole 
passage  seems  to  teach  that  the  laws  of  Moses,  without 
exception  or  distinction,  are  to  be  observed  while  the 
world  endures.  Hence  Baur,  despairing  of  interpreting 
the  words  in  accordance  with  what  he  believed  to  be  the 
real  attitude  of  Jesus,  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
do  not  give  a  correct  account  of  what  the  Speaker  said, 
and  sums  up  his  discussion  of  them  in  these  terms :  "  As 
Jesus  did  not  in  fact  confirm  the  ritual  law,  and  as,  on 
the  other  hand,  if  He  did  not  intend  to  confirm  it,  He 
could  not  have  expressed  Himself  in  such  a  way  as  to  its 
enduring  validity,  the  only  course  left  us  is  to  assume 
that  His  words  received  from  the  evangelist  a  Judaistic 
bias  which  they  had  not  as  they  came  from  His  mouth."  ^ 
There  are,  however,  some  features  of  this  same  utter- 
ance, even  as  it  stands,  which  provoke  reflection,  and 
suggest  the  doubt  whether  our  first  impression  of  its 
meaning  be  correct.  Does  not  the  repudiation  of  an 
intention  to  destroy  imply  a  consciousness  that  the  effect 
of  His  work  is  to  be  such  as  may  appear  a  destroying  in 
^  Matt.  V.  17-20.  -  Neutestamentliche  Theologie,  S.  55. 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      65 

tlie  eyes  of  many  ?  Then  why  say  of  one  who  by  word 
or  deed  sets  aside  any  of  the  commandments  that  he  is 
the  least  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  instead  of  saying  of 
him,  as  of  the  Pharisee,  that  he  cannot  enter  the  kingdom: 
the  position  taken  up  by  the  conservative  party  in  the 
Apostolic  Church  when  they  said  to  the  Gentile 
Christians,  "  Except  ye  be  circumcised  after  the  manner 
of  Moses,  ye  cannot  be  saved."  ^  It  seems  as  if  it  were 
not  a  question  of  mere  destroying,  but  rather  of  the  right 
way  of  doing  it,  and  as  if  the  attitude  of  the  Preacher 
were  something  like  this :  He  was  aware  that  His 
appearance  on  the  stage  of  history  might  bring  about  a 
crisis  in  reference  to  the  law,  and  inaugurate  a  new  era  in 
w^hich  much  would  be  changed.  But  He  was  conscious 
at  the  same  time  that  He  came  not  in  the  spirit  of  a 
destroyer,  full  of  headlong  zeal  against  rude  imperfect 
statutes  and  antiquated  customs,  but  rather  in  the  spirit 
of  profoundest  reverence  for  ancient  institutions,  believing 
that  everything  in  the  law,  down  to  its  minutest  rules, 
had  a  meaning  and  value  in  the  system  of  religion  and 
morals  to  which  it  belonged,  and  not  doubting  that  the 
least  important  of  the  commandments  could  not,  any 
more  than  the  most  weighty,  pass  away  till  their  pur- 
pose had  been  fulfilled.  Coming  in  this  spirit,  He  felt 
entitled  to  repudiate  abrogation  as  an  aim,  whatever  of 
that  nature  might  come  in  the  way  of  necessary  effect. 
He  had  no  taste  for  the  work  of  a  mere  destroyer,  no 
inclination  towards  the  vocation  of  a  legal  reformer 
demanding  the  abolition  of  this  or  the  other  particular 
statute  or  custom  as  no  longer  useful,  no  sympathy  with 
^  Acts  XV.  1 . 
E 


66  -      •  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  iconoclastic  zeal  which  rushes  passionately  at  abuses, 
bent  on  demolishing,  and  heedless  what  may  come  in  the 
idol's  place.  For  those  who  pursued  such  an  occupation 
He  had  not  unqualified  esteem,  though  they  might  be 
very  conscientious ;  nor  did  He  think  they  would  take  a 
high  place  in  the  kingdom  of  God.  Were  the  question 
put,  "  Who  is  the  greatest  in  the  kingdom  ? "  He  would 
certainly  not  say,  the  mere  reformer  or  destroyer.  He 
should  esteem  him  the  least,  whoever  might  be  the 
greatest :  greater  than  him  He  should  account  the  man 
who  honestly  did  all  things  enjoined,  and  taught  others 
to  do  them.     Him  He  called  great  in  the  kingdom. 

Great,  but  be  it  observed  not  even  he  is  called  the 
greatest.  That  place  is  reserved  for  one  who  not  merely 
does  the  commandments  and  teaches  respect  for  them, 
but  fulfils  them,  realizes  in  Himself  all  their  meaning, 
and  only  so,  if  at  all,  brings  about  the  annulment  of  any. 
Thus  we  get  an  ascending  scale  of  moral  worth.  The 
Pharisee,  the  man  of  form,  who  cares  more  for  the  little 
than  for  the  great  commandments,  has  no  moral  worth, 
and  is  not  in  the  kingdom  at  all.^  The  reformer  who  has 
a  keen  eye  for  abuses,  who  is  impatient  of  laws  whose 
utility  is  doubtful,  and  urgently  calls  for  change  where 
he  thinks  it  is  greatly  needed,  is  of  some  worth ;  he  is  in 
the  kingdom,  though  not  occupying  a  high  place  there. 
The  man  who  spends  not  his  energies  in  attacking  abuses, 
but  puts  his  heart  into  all  duties,  and  so  redeems 
from  formality  the  minutest  details  of  conduct,  and 
teaches  others  so  to  live,  is  of  greater  worth ;  is  not  only 
in  the  kingdom,  but  a  person  of  consideration  there. 
1  Matt.  V.  20. 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      67 

Finally,  he  who  not  only  does,  but  fulfils, — that  is,  by 
his  life-work  inaugurates  a  new  time  that  shall  be  the 
ripe  fruit  towards  which  the  old  time  with  its  institutions 
was  tending ;  and  so  satisfies  the  hearts  of  the  children 
of  the  new  time,  that  without  formal  abrogation  much 
that  belonged  to  the  old  shall  be  allowed  eventually  to 
fall  quietly  into  desuetude :  this  one  is  the  greatest  in 
the  kingdom,  the  man  of  absolute  moral  worth. 

This  interpretation  of  the  remarkable  saying  in  ques- 
tion is  at  least  legitimate,  if  not  the  only  one  conceivable. 
It  is  an  interpretation,  doubtless,  which  but  for  the  light 
of  subsequent  events,  we  might  not  have  thought  of. 
The  idea  of  a  distinction  between  doing  and  fulfilling,  or 
of  a  fulfilling  which  may  at  the  same  time  be  more  or 
less  an  undoing,  is  one  we  take  not  out  of  the  mere 
words,  but  out  of  history.  We  know  that  there  is  a 
fulfilling  which  is  at  the  same  time  an  undoing  at  all 
critical  periods,  and  we  bring  our  knowledge  as  a  help 
to  the  interpretation  of  words  spoken  by  one  who  has 
proved  to  be  the  greatest  of  all  Initiators,  and  conclude 
that  the  very  claim  to  fulfil  involves  a  virtual  intimation 
of  eventual  antiquation  to  a  greater  or  less  extent.  More 
than  this  we  cannot  make  of  the  solemn  declaration  on 
the  Mount.  We  cannot  learn  from  it  what  in  Law  or 
Prophets  should,  in  being  fulfilled,  be  at  the  same  time 
annulled.  By  the  nature  of  the  case,  such  information 
was  excluded,  because  to  give  such  information,  and  say, 
e.g.,  "  Circumcision  must  ere  long  pass  away,"  would  have 
been  to  belie  the  position  taken  up,  and  to  exchange  the 
high  vocation  of  a  fulfiller  for  the  comparatively  low 
vocation  of  a  reformer.     For  the  same  reason  we  ought 


68  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

not  to  expect  explicit  information  of  that  kind — a  list  of 
laws  marked  like  trees  in  a  forest  to  be  cut  down — 
anywhere  in  Christ's  teaching.  The  utmost  we  can  look 
for  are  hints,  incidental  indications  showing  like  straws 
in  what  direction  the  stream  of  tendency  was  flowing. 
Such  indications  are  not  wanting;  indications  which 
confirm  the  interpretation  given  of  the  text  in  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  and  help  us  also  to  determine 
for  ourselves  in  what  respects  Christ  in  fulfilling  was 
at  the  same  time  to  annul. 

The  very  silence  of  Christ  concerning  the  fundamental 
rite  of  the  old  Covenant  is,  as  Eeuss  has  remarked,  very 
significant.  Its  import  is,  indeed,  ambiguous ;  it  might 
be  held  to  mean  that  Christ  never  thought  of  calling  in 
question  the  perpetual  obligation  of  circumcision.  But 
it  is  hard  to  credit  this  while  reading  the  golden  sentences 
wherewith  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  opens,  and  in  which 
are  set  forth  the  requirements  for  citizenship  in  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  The  qualifications  specified  are 
exclusively  spiritual.  The  Beatitudes  take  us  away 
into  an  entirely  different  world  from  that  of  ritualism. 
We  can  hardly  imagine  Jesus  uttering  these  words : 
Blessed  are  the  poor,  the  meek,  the  pure,  the  peace- 
makers, the  persecuted,  with  the  mental  reservation, 
"provided  always  that  they  be  Israelites  and  circum- 
cised." We  cannot  help  feeling  that  the  kingdom  must 
be  wider  than  Israel,  and  its  blessings  independent  Of 
merely  external  and  ritual  conditions.  The  rite  by 
which  men  became  members  of  the  theocratic  common- 
wealth is  quietly  ignored. 

Another  significant  hint  that  in  the  new  kingdom  the 


CHRIST'S  ATTITUDE  TOWARDS  THE  MOSAIC  LAW.        69 

ceremonial  law  at  least  was  destined  to  fall  into  desuetude, 
may  be  found  in  the  words  spoken  by  Jesus  when  His 
disciples  were  blamed  for  neglecting  customary  ritual 
ablutions  before  eating :  "  Hear  me,  all  of  you,  and 
understand :  there  is  nothing  from  without  a  man  that 
going  into  him  can  defile  him,  but  the  things  which 
proceed  out  of  a  man  are  those  that  defile  a  man."^  By 
this  emphatic  utterance  Jesus  in  effect,  as  Baur  remarks, 
declared  the  observance  of  the  Mosaic  laws  of  purifica- 
tion to  be  something  morally  indifferent.  It  is  true, 
indeed,  that  the  fault  imputed  to  the  disciples  had  not 
been  disregard  of  the  Mosaic  ritual  law,  but  neglect  of 
the  traditions  of  the  elders  relating  to  ablutions  which 
were  designed  to  form  a  hedge  about  the  law,  and  ensure 
its  strict  observance.  But  it  is  manifest  that  the  word 
addressed  to  the  people  enunciates  a  principle  whose 
range  of  application  is  much  wider  than  these  traditions, 
and  which,  when  it  has  got  a  firm  hold  of  the  popular 
mind,  must  in  the  end  lead  to  the  non-observance  of  the 
Mosaic  laws  of  purification,  as  well  as  of  the  rules  super- 
added by  the  Eabbis.  That  it  was  taken  in  this  wide 
scope  in  the  Apostolic  Church,  and  specially  in  the  circle 
of  which  Peter  formed  the  centre,  may  be  inferred  from 
the  reflection  appended  by  the  second  evangelist  to  the 
explanation  of  His  own  saying  given  by  Christ  to  the 
disciples  :  "  This  He  said,  making  all  meats  clean."  ^  It 
has,  however,  been  maintained  of  late  that  the  saying  of 

1  Mark  vii.   14,    15.      Matthew's   version   (xv.   10,   11)  is    less 
emphatic. 

2  Mark  vii.  19,  last  clause,  according  to  the  approved  reading, 
which  substitutes  Kudecpl^uu  for  Ket^ecpt^^ou. 


70  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Jesus  to  the  multitude  is  parabolic,  and  that  it  must  be 
understood  as  referring  throughout  to  things  belonging 
to  the  physical  sphere.  The  things  that  proceed  out  of 
a  man  are  not,  as  in  the  subsequently  given  interpretation, 
moral  offences,  but  matters  discharged  from  the  body 
whether  in  health,  in  diseases  like  leprosy,  or  in  death. 
These,  not  the  eating  of  forbidden  meats,  defiled  in  the 
Levitical  sense,  and  it  was  against  the  defiling  influence 
of  these  that  the  Mosaic  rules  of  purification  were 
directed.  The  effect,  therefore,  of  Christ's  saying  was 
to  condemn  the  Pharisaic  additions  as  plants  which  God 
had  not  planted,  but  to  confirm  the  obligation  of  the 
Mosaic  laws  of  purification  as  of  divine  authority.^ 
This  is  ingenious  but  not  convincing.  If  Christ  meant 
to  tell  the  multitude  that  ceremonial  defilement  pro- 
ceeded from  matters  discharged  from  the  body,  not  from 
the  kind  of  food  taken,  it  is  difficult  to  see  why  in  the 
subsequent  conversation  with  His  disciples  He  gave  a 
spiritual  turn  to  the  thought,  and  made  the  things  which 
proceed  out  of  a  man,  evil  thoughts,  fornications,  thefts, 
and  the  like.  Why  not  rather  ^explain  to  them,  the 
future  apostles,  His  exact  position  on  the  topic  raised  by 
Pharisaic  criticism,  viz.  that  what  He  condemned  was 
simply  Eabbinical  additions  to  Mosaic  rules,  and  that 
He  believed  in  the  perpetual  obligation  of  the  latter? 
The  reference  to  the  moral  evils  proceeding  from  the 
heart  lifts  the  whole  subject  above  the  level  of 
ceremonialism,  and  irresistibly  conveys  the  impression 
that,  in  the  view  of  the  Speaker,  the  only  cleanness 
and  uncleanness  that  are  real  and  worth  minding  are 
^  Weiss,  Lehen  Jesii,  ii.  S.  116. 


Christ's  attitude  to"W'akds  the  mosaic  law.      71 

those  whicli  arise  from  morally  right  and  wrong  feelings 
and  actions. 

A  third  straw  showing  the  direction  of  the  stream  of 
tendency  may  be  found  in  the  word  spoken  by  Jesus  in 
Perffia  towards  the  close  of  His  ministry  concerning  the 
Mosaic  statute  of  divorce :  "  Moses  out  of  regard  to  the 
hardness  of  your  heart  suffered  you  to  put  away  your 
wives,  but  from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so."  ^  It  was 
a  distinct  declaration  that  this  particalar  law  was  a  con- 
cession on  the  part  of  the  Jewish  legislator  to  a  rude 
moral  condition,  and  a  departure  from  the  primitive 
ideal.  In  Mark's  narrative,  the  conversation  between 
Christ  and  His  captious  interrogators  is  so  arranged  that 
there  is  less  of  the  appearance  of  calling  in  question  the 
authority  of  Moses  than  in  Matthew's  version  of  the 
incident.  The  first  evangelist  makes  Christ,  in  answer 
to  His  interrogants,  at  once  announce  the  original  law  of 
marriage  as  ordained  by  God  at  the  creation,  whereby 
Moses  seems  to  be  set  in  antagonism  to  the  Creator,  as 
ordaining  an  inferior  law,  though  not  without  excuse  in 
the  moral  condition  of  his  people.  In  the  account  given 
by  the  second  evangelist,  on  the  other  hand,^  Jesus  meets 
the  question  put  by  the  Pharisees  with  another.  What 
did  Moses  command  you  ?  It  is  possible  that  He  meant 
thereby  to  hint  that  Moses  had  given  more  than  one  law 
on  the  subject,  regarding  the  primitive  law  in  Genesis  as 
his,  not  less  than  the  law  in  Deuteronomy.  In  that  case 
He  merely  appealed  from  Moses  to  Moses ;  from  what 
Moses  allowed  under  pressure  of  circumstances,  to  what 
Moses  must  have  known,  if,  as  all  Jews  believed,  he  was 
1  Matt.  xix.  8.  2  Mark  x.  2-9. 


72  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  author  of  the  five  books,  and  doubtless  approved  as 
the  ideally  perfect  law  concerning  the  relation  of  the 
sexes.  Nevertheless,  assuming  Mark's  version  to  be  the 
more  accurate,  and  the  drift  of  Christ's  argument  to  be 
as  indicated,  the  fact  remains  that  the  Deuteronomic 
statute  regulating,  and  by  implication  sanctioning,  divorce 
for  other  reasons  besides  adultery,  was  explicitly  declared 
to  be  a  statute  "  not  good,"  adapted  to  the  sklerohardia 
of  Israel.  And  as  that  statute  did  not  stand  alone,  but 
was  only  a  sample  of  many  of  the  same  kind,  the  general 
position  was  virtually  laid  down  that  the  whole  Mosaic 
civil  code  was  far  from  perfect,  and  consequently  could 
not  be  permanently  valid,  but  must  pass  away  in  that 
kingdom  where  the  shlerokardia  is  removed,  and  is 
replaced  by  the  "  new  heart,"  ^ 

From  these  indications  of  Christ's  attitude  towards 
the  ceremonial  and  civil  laws  of  Moses,  we  pass  to  inquire 
what  position  He  assumed  in  reference  to  what  we  are 
wont  to  call  the  "moral"  law,  that  is,  the  Decalogue. 
The  interest  here  concentrates  on  the  institution  of  the 
weekly  rest,  which,  some  think,  ought  to  be  included  in 
the  same  category  as  circumcision,  maintaining  also  that 
it  was  actually  so  regarded  by  Jesus.  I  shall  here  go 
into  the  question  so  far  only  as  is  necessary  to  ascertain 
how  far  the  latter  allegation  is  correct.  And  I  begin 
with  the  observation  that  it  is  antecedently  unlikely  that 
Jesus  would  treat  circumcision  and  the  Sabbath  as  in  all 


1  See  on  the  above  topic,  Weiss  in  liis  Lehen  Jesu,  and  also  in  his 
two  works  on  the  Gospels  of  Matthew  and  Mark.  He  contends  for 
the  accuracy  of  Mark's  version,  and  does  his  utmost  to  minimize  the 
significance  of  Christ's  words  as  a  criticism  on  Mosaic  legislation. 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      73 

respects  of  the  same  nature.  They  were  certainly  not 
so  treated  under  the  law.  For  though  circumcision  was 
of  fundamental  importance  in  the  covenant  between 
Jehovah  and  Israel,  yet  it  was  not  thought  necessary  to 
put  it  among  the  Ten  Words ;  whereas  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath  does  find  a  place  there  along  with  precepts 
generally  admitted  to  be  ethical  in  their  nature,  and 
therefore  of  perpetual  obligation  in  their  substance. 
"Why  is  this  ?  Apparently  because  circumcision  con- 
cerned Israel  alone,  whereas  in  the  Ten  Words  it  was 
intended  that  that  only  should  find  a  place  which  was 
believed  to  concern  all  mankind.  The  Decalogue  wears 
the  aspect  of  an  attempt  to  sum  up  the  heads  of  moral 
duty,  put  in  a  form,  and  enforced  with  reasons,  it  may 
be,  adapted  to  the  history  and  circumstances  of  the 
chosen  race,  but  in  their  substance  concerning  not  Jews 
only,  but  men  in  general.  Speaking  of  the  Decalogue  as 
the  work  of  Moses,  we  may  say  that  from  it  we  learn 
what  in  his  judgment  all  men  ought  to  do  in  order  to 
please  God,  and  live  wisely  and  happily.  And  we  can 
see  for  ourselves  that  circumcision  and  the  Sabbath  are 
in  important  respects  entirely  different  institutions.  Cir- 
cumcision was  purely  ritual,  a  mere  arbitrary  sign  or 
symbol,  a  mark  set  on  Israel  to  distinguish  and  separate 
her  from  the  heathen  peoples  around.  But  the  Sab- 
bath was  essentially  a  good  thing.  Kest  from  toil  is 
good  for  the  body,  and  rest  in  worshipful  acknowledg- 
ment of  God  as  the  Maker  and  Preserver  of  all  is 
equally  good  for  the  spirit.  Eest  in  both  senses  is  a 
permanent  need  of  man  in  this  world,  and  a  law  pre- 
scribing a  resting  day  as  a  holiday  and  holy  day  is  a 


74  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

beneficent  law,  which  no  one  havinof  a  recrard  to  human 
wellbeing  can  have  any  wish  to  abrogate. 

Turning  now  to  the  Gospel  records  :  do  we  find  Jesus 
speaking  of  the  Sabbath  as,  say,  of  ritual  washings — i.e. 
as  a  thing  morally  indifferent,  whose  abolition  would  be 
no  real  loss  to  men  ?  We  do  not.  On  the  contrary,  we 
find  Him  invariably  treating  the  institution  with  respect, 
as  intrinsically  a  good  thing ;  and  His  quarrel  with  the 
Pharisees  on  this  head  was  not  as  to  observance,  but  as 
to  the  right  manner  of  observing  the  law.  The  Pharisees 
made  the  day  not  a  boon,  but  a  burden ;  not  a  day  given 
by  God  to  man  in  mercy,  but  a  day  taken  from  man  by 
God  in  an  exacting  spirit.  Having  this  idea  of  the 
weekly  rest  in  their  minds,  they  naturally  made  it  as 
burdensome  and  irksome  as  possible,  not  a  delight,  but  a 
horror,  giving  ridiculously  minute  definitions  of  work, 
and  placing  the  merit  of  Sabbath-keeping  in  mere  absti- 
nence from  work  so  defined,  apart  altogether  from  the 
nature  of  the  work.  "With  this  Pharisaic  idea  of  the 
Sabbath,  and  the  manner  in  which  it  was  worked  out  in 
practice,  Jesus  had  no  sympathy.  He  conceived  of  the 
institution,  not  as  a  burden,  but  as  a  boon ;  not  as  a  day 
taken  from  man,  but  as  a  day  given  to  him  by  a  bene- 
ficent Providence.  This  idea  He  expressed  in  a  remark- 
able saying,  found,  curiously  enough,  only  in  Mark,  but 
doubtless  a  most  authentic  apostolic  tradition  :  "  The 
Sabbath  was  made  on  account  of  man,  not  man  on 
account  of  the  Sabbath."  ^  He  meant  to  say  that  God 
appointed  the  Sabbath  for  man's  good,  and  that  it  must 
be  so  observed  as  to  realize  the  end  originally  contem- 
1  Mark  ii.  27. 


chfjst's  attitude  towaeds  the  mosaic  law.      75 

plated ;  men  must  not  be  made  the  slaves  of  the  Sabbath, 
as  they  were  by  the  Pharisaic  method  of  interpreting 
and  enforcins:  the  statute.  This  beinc^  His  meaninc^,  He 
consistently  said,  the  Sabbath  was  made  for  man,  not  the 
Sabbath  was  made  for  Jcvjs,  so  giving  the  saying  a  uni- 
versal character.  One  who  so  thought  of  the  institution 
could  have  no  interest  in  its  abolition.  He  would  rather 
desire  to  extend  the  benefit,  and  He  would  favour  only 
such,  changes  as  might  be  needful  to  make  the  benefit  as 
great  and  as  wide-reaching  as  possible.  Accordingly, 
Jesus  did  not  propose  to  abolish  the  beneficent  institute. 
He  did,  indeed,  claim  lordship  over  the  Sabbath  -  day. 
But  He  claimed  it  not  with  a  view  to  abolition,  but  in 
order  to  give  full  effect  to  the  principle  that  the  Sabbath 
was  made  for  man,  that  is,  for  his  good,  and  to  emphasize 
the  true  motive  of  observance,  love,  the  supreme  law  of 
His  kingdom.  In  other  words,  Christ's  claim  of  lordship 
was  a  claim  of  right  to  humanize  the  Sabbath,  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  Pharisees  who  had  BahUnizcd  it,  and  made  it 
a  snare  to  the  conscience  and  a  burden  to  the  spirit. 

An  esteemed  writer  has  given  an  entirely  different 
interpretation  to  the  saying  recorded  by  Mark,  according 
to  which  Christ  meant  to  draw  a  distinction  between  the 
laws  that  are  of  permanent  validity  and  those  that  are 
transient,  including  the  Sabbath  in  the  latter  category. 
The  permanent  laws  are  those  which  are  an  end  for  man, 
the  transient  are  those  which  have  man  for  their  end. 
The  former  set  forth  man's  chief  end — the  moral  ideal ; 
the  latter  are  merely  means  subservient  to  some  tem- 
porary human  interest.^  I  gravely  doubt  the  soundness 
1  Ritschl,  Die  Entstehung  des  AltJiatholischen  Kirche,  S.  30. 


76  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

of  the  construction  thus  put  on  our  Lord's  words.  And 
as  for  the  distinction  taken  between  two  sorts  of  laws,  it 
depends  on  the  respect  in  which  a  law  has  man  for  its 
end,  whether  it  be  of  a  temporary  character  or  otherwise. 
If  a  law  have  man  for  its  end,  in  the  sense  of  having 
for  its  aim  his  highest  wellbeing,  then  it  is  not  transient, 
even  on  the  principle  enunciated  by  the  author  referred 
to,  for  in  that  case  it  is  at  the  same  time  an  end  for  man. 
The  moral  ideal  and  man's  highest  happiness  coincide. 
On  this  view  there  is  no  good  reason  for  the  Sabbath 
passing  away.  It  is  made  for  man,  doubtless,  but  not  in 
the  sense  in  which  the  statute  of  divorce  was  made. 
The  latter  was  an  accommodation  to  man's  moral  weak- 
ness, the  former  was  instituted  to  promote  man's  physical 
and  spiritual  wellbeing,  and  it  is  fitted  to  serve  that  end 
in  perpetuity.  The  kingdom  of  God  therefore  cannot 
frown  on  the  Sabbath  as  it  must  frown  on  the  concession 
made  by  Moses  to  the  rude  moral  condition  of  Israel  in 
the  matter  of  marriage.  It  must  regard  the  day  of  rest 
with  favour,  even  if  it  looked  on  it  as  an  outside  institu- 
tion, and  not  of  strictly  ethical  contents ;  wherever  the 
spirit  of  the  kingdom  prevails,  the  general  desire  will  be, 
not  for  its  abolition,  but  for  its  retention.  Christianity 
countenances  the  Sabbath  just  as,  and  on  the  same  general 
ground  that  it  discountenances  slavery.  Even  as,  though 
not  formally  condemning  slavery,  yet  being  hostile  to  it, 
as  injurious  to  the  moral  dignity  of  man,  the  Christian 
religion  surely  tended  towards  its  abolition ;  so,  though 
not  formally  decreeing  the  perpetuating  of  a  seventh  day 
rest,  yet  being  favourable  to  it  as  promotive  of  man's 
wellbeing,  the  Christian  religion  surely  tended  from  the 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      77 

first  towards  the  perpetuation  and  the  extension  of  the 
blessings  it  conferred  throughout  the  world. 

Quite  in  accordance  with  the  view  I  have  given  of  our 
Lord's  attitude  towards  the  Sabbath  was  the  manner  of 
His  defence  against  the  Pharisaic  charge  of  Sabbatli- 
breaking.  He  did  not  admit  that  He  and  His  disciples 
were  Sabbath-breakers,  but  took  up  the  ground  that  their 
conduct  was  in  accordance  with  the  Sabbath  law  rightly 
interpreted.  The  correct  view  of  the  Sabbath  being  that 
it  was  meant  to  be  a  boon,  not  a  burden — that  it  was 
made  for  man's  benefit — the  right  observance  was  that 
which  best  promoted  the  end  aimed  at — man's  good ;  the 
wrong  that  which  frustrated  the  design,  and  turned  a 
boon  into  a  burden.  In  applying  this  principle  to  His 
own  works  of  healing,  Jesus  said :  not,  It  is  permissible 
to  do  any  sort  of  work  on  the  Sabbath,  for  the  law  is  no 
longer  binding ;  but.  It  is  lawful  to  do  well  on  the 
Sabbath.^  In  defence  of  His  disciples,  who,  according  to 
current  ideas,  had  been  guilty  of  working  in  rubbing  the 
ears  of  corn  (it  was  a  kind  of  thrashing !),  Jesus  reminded 
the  fault-finders  of  God's  word :  "  I  will  have  mercy  and 
not  sacrifice,"  and  told  them  that  had  they  laid  to  heart 
the  divine  oracle,  they  should  not  have  condemned  the 
o'uiltless.^ 

It  remains  to  add  that  Christ's  favourable  attitude 
towards  the  Sabbath  becomes  all  the  more  significant 
when  it  is  contrasted  with  the  free  position  He  took  up 
in  reference  to  the  civil  and  ceremonial  law.  Had  He, 
as  some  think,  been  an  indiscriminate  conservative,  treat- 
ing with  equal  reverence  all  parts  of  the  Mosaic  system, 
1  Matt.  xii.  12.  2  Matt.  xii.  7. 


78  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

His  respect  for  the  day  of  rest  would  have  been  no 
argument  in  favour  of  its  perpetuity.  That  institution 
might  have  been  doomed,  notwithstanding,  to  pass  away, 
like  circumcision,  with  the  old  Jewish  world  to  which 
both  alike  belonged.  But  when  we  find  one  who  could 
freely  criticize  venerable  customs  resting  on  the  authority 
of  the  Hebrew  legislator,  in  the  light  of  the  new  era,  so 
careful  to  clear  Himself  of  all  suspicion  of  irreverence 
towards  the  fourth  commandment,  we  cannot  help  feeling 
that  the  rest  therein  enjoined  does  not  altogether  belong 
to  the  old  world  about  to  pass  away,  but  is  worthy  to 
find  a  place  in  the  new  order  of  things.  There  may  be  a 
sense  in  which,  as  Paul  taught,  the  Sabbath  belonged  to 
the  era  of  shadows ;  but  there  must  be  a  sense  also  in 
wdiich  it  belongs  to  the  era  of  spiritual  realities. 

Of  the  other  precepts  of  the  Decalogue  Christ  ever 
spoke  respectfully  as  enjoining  duties  incumbent  on  all ; 
as  when  He  said  to  the  young  ruler,  "  If  thou  wilt  enter 
into  life,  keep  the  commandments,"  ^  enumerating  the  first 
four  of  the  second  table  to  illustrate  His  meaning.  But, 
while  recognising  the  perpetual  obligation  of  these  com- 
mandments. He  preferred  to  sum  up  duty  in  tlie  one 
comprehensive  word  Love :  "  Love  God  with  all  thy 
heart,  and  thy  neighbour  as  thyself."  On  these  two  com- 
mands, said  He,  hung  all  that  the  law  required  and  the 
prophets  taught.^  The  originality  of  the  saying  lay  not 
in  the  mere  words,  for  they  occur  in  the  Pentateuch,  but 
in  the  new  emphasis  put  upon  it.  Because  of  that  Jesus 
was,  and  claimed  to  be,  a  fulfiller,  in  the  pregnant  sense, 
,of  the  I)ecalogue  in  particular,  as  of  the  law  and  prophets 
1  Matt.  xix.  17.  2  Matt.  vii.  12,  xxii.  37-40. 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      79 

in  general.  In  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  He  ilkistrated 
the  sense  in  which  He  claimed  to  be  a  fulfiller  by  taking 
up  successively  several  precepts  of  the  Decalogue,  and 
insisting,  in  connection  with  each,  not  on  the  outward 
act  of  obedience  only,  but  on  conformity  of  inward  dis- 
position to  the  principle  embodied  in  the  precept.  The 
law  said,  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  and  when  men  abstained 
from  taking  away  each  other's  lives,  the  law,  as  a  code 
for  the  government  of  a  nation,  was  satisfied.  But  the 
Preacher  said,  "  Wliosoever  is  angry  with  his  brother 
shall  be  in  danger  of  the  judgment ; "  ^  so  interdicting  not 
only  murder  but  hatred,  not  only  violent  deeds  but  wicked 
passions.  Thus  He  transformed  a  law  of  the  Decalogue 
into  a  law  of  the  divine  kingdom. 

The  result  of  our  inquiry  then  is  this :  Christ  came  to 
fulfil  the  law  of  the  Ten  Words  by  going  back  with  new 
emphasis  on  its  great  underlying  principle — love  to  God 
and  to  man;  He  came  to  fulfil  the  meaning,  and  not 
immediately,  but  as  foreknown  eventual  result,  to  annul 
the  obligation  of  the  ceremonial  law  by  putting  substance 
in  place  of  shadow,  spiritual  reality  in  place  of  ritual 
emblem  ;  He  came  to  antiquate  the  civil  law  by  removing 
the  shier okardia,  and  raising  up  a  race  who  should  be 
able  to  order  their  lives  according  to  a  higher  ideal  All 
this  He  did,  however,  after  the  manner  of  a  prophet 
rather  than  after  the  manner  of  a  legislator.  He  came 
not  to  be  a  rival  to  Moses,  but  to  originate  a  new  life 
which  should  be  self -legislative. 

When  we  consider  the  manner  in  which  the  hints, 
whereon  the  foregoing  induction  is  founded,  were  given, 
^  Matt.  V.  22. 


80  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

we  see  how  truly  Christ  could  say :  "  I  came  not  to 
destroy."  They  were  uttered  for  the  most  part  in  self- 
defence.  It  seems  as  if,  had  He  been  left  alone,  He 
would  have  been  content  to  introduce  the  new  life,  and 
leave  it  to  create  for  itself  congenial  habitudes  without 
giving  any  indication  what  these  were  to  be.  As  it  was, 
He  said  no  more  than  was  barely  necessary  to  defend 
Himself  against  accusers.  In  spite  of  much  provocation, 
at  the  very  last.  He  counselled  the  people  to  give  heed 
to  the  teaching  of  the  scribes  who  sat  in  Moses'  seat, 
bidding  them  only  beware  of  their  practice.  He  would 
not  on  any  account  be  irritated  into  becoming  a  stirrer 
up  of  discontent,  or  an  agitator  against  existing  customs, 
or  a  hot-headed  leader  of  zealots  bent  on  overturning  an 
ancient  social  and  religious  system.  All  things  con- 
sidered, therefore,  the  conclusion,  well  expressed  by  Baur, 
must  be  accepted  as  just,  that  while  Jesus  introduced 
into  some  of  His  expressions  what  might  form  the  ground 
of  an  opposition  on  principle,  not  only  against  the  pre- 
scriptions of  the  Pharisees,  but  even  against  the  continued 
absolute  validity  of  the  law.  He  did  not  wish  to  come  to 
an  open  breach,  but  left  the  development  of  the  opposition 
already  existing  in  implicit  form,  to  the  spirit  of  His 
doctrine,  which  must  of  itself  lead  eventually  thereto. 

In  view  of  this  conclusion,  we  are  able  to  understand 
that  saying  of  Christ  concerning  the  Baptist,  which  has 
been  somewhat  of  a  puzzle  to  interpreters  :  "Among  them 
that  are  born  of  women  there  hath  not  risen  a  greater 
than  John  the  Baptist ;  notwithstanding,  he  that  is  least 
in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  greater  than  he."  ^  "VYe  are 
1  Matt.  xi.  11. 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      81 

not  obliged  to  have  recourse  to  the  ingenious  construc- 
tion put  by  Chrysostom  on  the  last  part  of  the  sentence : 
"  I,  Jesus,  who  as  yet  am  less  than  John  in  public 
esteem,  am  greater  than  he  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 
though  not  in  the  judgment  of  the  world."  Keeping  in 
mind  the  great  word  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
wherein  the  Preacher  defined  His  relation  to  the  legal 
economy,  and  expressed  His  judgment  in  reference  to 
diverse  types  of  character,  we  have  no  difficulty  in 
seeing  the  truth  and  point  of  this  saying,  viewed  as  a 
declaration  that  one  occupying  a  comparatively  humble 
place  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven  was  greater  than  John, 
supremely  great  though  he  was  in  his  own  line.  For 
John  was  in  tendency  and  temper  a  destroyer,  not 
indeed  with  reference  to  Mosaic  institutions,  but  with 
reference  to  the  actual  religious  life  of  his  time.  He 
lived  the  life  of  a  hermit  in  the  wild,  taking  no  part 
apparently  in  the  temple  services,  through  an  uncon- 
querable disgust  at  prevailing  hypocrisy.  He  denounced 
the  Pharisees,  whom  he  saw  on  the  outskirts  of  the 
crowd  that  gathered  around  him  by  the  Jordan,  as  a 
generation  of  vipers.  He  declared  that  the  axe  was 
already  at  the  root  of  the  tree,  ready  to  hew  down  an 
unproductive  viue.  He  proclaimed  the  approach  of  one 
who  with  fan  in  hand  should  separate  wheat  from  chaff, 
and  burn  the  chaff  in  unquenchable  fire.  And  when 
the  coming  One  had  come,  and  had  been  long  enough 
at  work  to  show  the  manner  of  His  working,  John,  now 
a  prisoner,  doubted  whether  He  were  after  all  the  Man 
he  had  looked  for.  Why  ?  Because  he  saw  no  axe  or 
fan  in  His  hand.     He  heard  reports  of  deeds  of  mercy, 

F 


82  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

and  of  gracious  words  spoken  unto  the  poor,  but  he 
heard  no  reports  of  deeds  of  judgment.  This  was  too 
genial  a  Messiah  for  his  taste.  The  method  of  Jesus 
was  also  too  leisurely  for  the  prophet's  ardent  tempera- 
ment. Assuming  that  He  had  the  same  general  end  in 
view  as  himself — a  kingdom  of  righteousness — He  was 
far  too  tolerant  in  His  spirit.  John  desiderated  an 
immediate  crisis  or  catastrophe.  Separate  the  good  from 
the  bad,  destroy  the  bad  and  make  the  good,  like  Noah's 
family,  the  nucleus  of  a  new  godly  nation.  Simple, 
thoroughgoing  programme,  most  satisfactory  to  a  prophet's 
earnest  temper !  But  no  such  programme  did  Jesus 
seem  to  have.  He  went  about  in  Galilee  doing  all  the 
good  He  could,  and  left  the  religious  world  of  Judsea,  of 
whose  hollowness  He  was  well  aware,  to  go  its  own  way. 
Therefore  John  stood  seriously  in  doubt  of  Him.  And 
this  doubt  of  John's  is  one  of  the  most  convincing  proofs 
that  his  kingdom  of  God  and  that  of  Christ  were  not  the 
same  thing.  There  can  be  no  greater  mistake  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  Gospel  history  than  to  explain 
away  that  doubt,  or  to  minimize  its  significance.  It  is 
an  index  showing  how  wide  apart  in  idea  and  spirit 
were  the  two  great  ones,  who  nevertheless  were  fellow- 
workers  for  God  and  righteousness  among  their  people. 
That  Christ  did  not  under-estimate  its  significance  the 
saying  now  under  consideration  proves.  He  divined 
what  was  passing  through  the  prophet's  mind  when  he 
sent  the  message  of  inquiry,  and  He  said  in  effect : 
"  John  is  great,  none  greater  of  his  kind,  a  true  hero  of 
moral  law,  who  has  braved  the  wrath  of  earth's  mighty 
ones,   and   told   them    their    duty,   regardless   of   conse- 


Christ's  attitude  towards  the  mosaic  law.      83 

quences.  I  deeply  honour  him,  though  he  now  stand  in 
doubt  of  me.  Yet  John  is  a  one-sided  defective  man. 
Strong  in  zeal,  he  is  weak  in  love ;  strong  in  denuncia- 
tion of  evil,  he  is  weak  in  patience  towards  the  sinful ; 
strong  in  moral  austerity,  he  is  weak  in  the  social 
sympathetic  a£fections.  In  these  respects  any  one  in 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  animated  by  its  characteristic 
spirit  of  love  and  patient  hope  is  greater  than  he." 

In  so  speaking  of  John,  Christ,  it  is  hardly  necessary 
to  remark,  did  not  mean  to  shut  him  out  of  the  kingdom, 
though  an  impression  to  the  contrary  constitutes  for 
many  the  chief  difficulty  of  the  saying.  Possibly  the 
use  of  the  comparative — the  less  in  the  kingdom — 
indicates  a  desire  to  avoid  the  appearance  of  such  an 
intention.  But  even  taking  the  comparative  as  having 
the  force  of  a  superlative,  the  exclusion  of  John  from 
the  kingdom  is  to  be  understood  simply  in  the  sense 
that  John  had  not  identified  himself  openly  with  the 
movement  of  which  Jesus  was  the  centre.  That  was  a 
simple  matter  of  fact.  John  was  intensely  interested  in 
the  kingdom ;  he  had  laboured  for  it  as  a  pioneer ;  he 
had  announced  its  near  approach ;  he  prayed  daily  for 
its  coming.  But  his  conception  of  the  kingdom  differed 
so  widely  from  the  kingdom  as  it  actually  appeared  in 
the  person  of  Jesus  and  the  society  that  gathered  around 
Him,  that  he  was  not  able  to  give  the  reality  a  hearty 
welcome ;  he  stood  aloof,  a  doubting,  puzzled  spectator, 
wondering  what  it  might  all  mean. 

So  understood,  Christ's  judgment  of  the  Baptist  con- 
firms our  interpretation  of  the  text  in  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount,  and  throws    light   on   the   attitude   of    the 


84  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Messianic  King  towards  established  law  and  custom. 
The  Inaugurator  of  the  new  era  declined  the  part  which 
His  forerunner  had  assigned  to  Him — declined  to  adopt 
as  his  insignia  the  axe  and  the  fan,  and  to  come  before 
the  world  as  the  embodiment  of  divine  disgust  and  fury. 
He  preferred  to  appear  as  One  "  full  of  grace  and  truth.' 
He  knew  well  that  the  axe  and  the  fan  were  needed, 
but  He  did  not  believe  in  the  Baptist's  method  of 
reaching  the  desired  end.  His  way  was  not  that  of 
reform  but  of  regeneration,  not  of  judgment  but  of 
mercy,  not  of  impatience  and  intolerance  and  rupture, 
but  of  quiet,  silent  influence,  leading  slowly  but  surely 
to  the  new  creation,  bringing  it  in  noiselessly,  gradually, 
like  the  dawn  of  day.  Ultimately  the  kingdom  was  to 
bring  about  much  more  extensive  change  than  John  was 
prepared  for ;  but  the  means  were  to  be,  not  the  axe  and 
the  fan,  but  the  vital  force  of  a  new  life,  the  fermenta- 
tion of  the  new  wine.  The  bottles  of  Judaism  must 
burst  some  day,  but  what  need  for  passionately  tearing 
them  to  pieces  ?  The  wine  will  do  the  work,  in  good 
time,  of  itself. 


CHAPTEE  III. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE. 


The  second  evangelist  represents  our  Lord  as  commenc- 
ing His  public  ministry  in  Galilee  with  the  announce- 
ment, "  The  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand :  repent  ye,  and 
believe  in  the  good  news."  ^  Eepentance  and  faith  were 
thus  at  the  outset  declared  to  be  the  conditions  of 
admission  into  the  kingdom.  What  did  Christ  mean  by 
the  words,  and  why  are  the  things  denoted  indispensable 
to  citizenship  ? 

The  doctrine  of  Jesus  on  repentance  and  faith,  especi- 
ally the  former,  can  be  fully  understood  only  when  we 
have  become  acquainted  with  other  parts  of  His  teaching, 
particularly  His  doctrine  concerning  God,  man,  and  the 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom.  The  contents  of  the  idea 
of  repentance  must  depend  on  the  views  set  forth  on 
these  cardinal  topics.  If  God  be  a  Father,  then  repent- 
ance will  mean  ceasing  to  regard  Him  under  any  lower 
aspect;  if  man  be  a  being  of  infinite  importance  as  a 
moral  subject  and  son  of  God,  then  repentance  will  mean 
realizing  human  dignity  and  responsibility ;  if  the  right- 
eousness of  the  kingdom  be  spiritual  and  inward,  having 
reference  not  merely  to  outward  acts  but  to  motives,  then 
the  summons  to  repentance  will  be  a  call  not  merely  to 
1  Mark  i.  15. 

85 


86  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

a  life  for  moral  ends,  but  to  self-criticism,  so  as  to  discern 
between  true  and  false  righteousness.  Tor  the  present, 
our  inquiry  must  refer  more  to  form  than  to  matter,  to 
principles  rather  than  to  details.  These,  after  all,  are 
the  chief  points ;  for  when  we  have  settled  the  general 
nature  of  repentance,  as  Christ  preached  it,  the  particulars 
can  be  filled  in  afterwards  without  difficulty. 

On  this  subject,  as  in  reference  to  the  idea  of  the 
kingdom,  there  is  a  marked  difference  in  tone  and  drift 
between  Christ's  teaching  and  that  of  the  Baptist.  Both 
use  the  same  form  of  words,  but  they  do  not  mean  the 
same  thing.  The  one  instance  of  divergence  is  the  effect 
of  the  other.  Christ's  conception  of  repentance  springs 
out  of  His  new  thoughts  concerning  the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  "  When  heaven  and  earth  move  towards  each 
other,  as  in  Christ's  preaching  of  the  kingdom,  then  on 
the  part  both  of  God  and  man  must  the  Nay  give  place 
to  the  Yea,  anger  to  love,  fear  to  joy,  shame  to  right 
action ;  and  in  festive  attire,  not  in  mourning  weeds, 
all  that  has  affinity  for  the  Divine  goes  to  meet  the 
approaching  God,  proud  to  be  or  to  become  like  Him."  ^ 
The  contrast  between  Jesus  and  John  is  specially 
I  apparent  at  two  points.  There  is  first  an  inwardness 
in  Christ's  doctrine  that  is  wholly  lacking  in  John's. 
To  perceive  this,  we  have  only  to  compare  the  Sermon  on 
the  Mount  with  the  directions  given  by  the  Baptist  to 
publicans,  soldiers,  and  others,  who  inquired  what  he 
would  have  them  do.^     The    Sermon,  which  considered 

1  Keim,  Jesu  von  Nazara,  ii.  77. 

'^  Luke  iii.  10-14.     This  is  one  of  Luke's  additions,  but  doubtless 
he  had  a  voucher  for  it  in  his  sources.     The  particulars  supplied  in 


THE  CONDITIOXS  OF  ENTRANCE.  87 

positively  is  an  exposition  of  the  righteousness  of  the 
kingdom,  may  be  regarded  negatively  as  an  aid  to  self- 
criticism  and  exhortation  to  repentance.  With  this  view- 
it  bids  men  look  into  their  hearts,  and  examine  their 
affections  and  the  motives  from  which  apparently  good 
actions  spring.  John,  on  the  other  hand,  directed  atten- 
tion merely  to  outward  conduct,  admonishing  penitents 
to  practise  neighbourliness,  honesty,  contentment  with 
their  wages.  It  was  enough,  if  the  coming  kingdom  was 
merely  the  restored  theocratic  kingdom  of  Israel,  a 
secular  kingdom,  only  more  virtuous  than  usual.  In  a 
kingdom  of  this  world  the  ruler  can  take  cognizance  only 
of  external  acts.  If  the  people  abstain  from  stealing, 
violence,  lying,  adultery,  they  are  in  the  eye  of  law  a 
righteous  nation ;  and  they  are  treated  as  such  even  by 
the  moral  order  of  the  world,  for  every  nation  which 
practises  these  and  kindred  virtues  is  found  to  prosper. 
The  fact  that  Christ  turned  the  thoughts  of  His  hearers 
from  acts  to  dispositions,  shows  conclusively  that  He  had 
in  view  a  kingdom  of  another  and  higher  description, — 
"  not  of  this  world." 

The  other  point  of  contrast  is  that  repentance  as  John 
preached  it  was  an  affair  of  details,  while  as  Christ 
preached  it,  it  was  a  matter  of  principle,  a  radical  change 
in  the  chief  end  of  life.  John  came  preaching  in  the 
wilderness  of  Judaa,  saying,  "  Eepent,  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  at  hand."  He  meant,  "  Alter  your  ways  w^her- 
ever  they  are  amiss,  for  the  great,  dread  King  is  near." 

these  verses  as  to  the  counsels  given  by  John  to  inquirers  may  be 
accepted  at  the  very  least  as  a  true  reflection  of  the  impression 
which  John's  preaching  had  made  on  the  popular  mind. 


88  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

His  call  resembled  a  summons  to  the  population  of  a  city 
to  which  the  monarch  is  about  to  make  a  royal  visit,  to 
remove  all  nuisances  out  of  the  way,  and  to  put  on 
holiday  attire,  and  turn  out  into  the  street  to  give  their 
sovereign  a  worthy  reception.  But  Christ  called  men  to 
more  than  a  reform  of  this  or  that  bad  habit,  even  to  a 
radical  change  of  mind,  consisting  in  the  recognition 
of  the  kingdom  as  the  highest  Good,  and  the  most 
important  subject  that  could  engage  their  attention. 
"  Seek  ye  first,"  He  said,  *'  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  His 
righteousness  ;  "  ^  meaning,  "  Hitherto  ye  have  been  living 
as  if  life  were  no  more  than  meat,  and  the  supreme 
question  for  you  has  been.  What  shall  we  eat,  what  shall 
we  drink,  wherewithal  shall  we  be  clothed  ?  Henceforth 
let  a  loftier  aim  guide  you,  even  to  be  citizens  of  the 
Divine  kingdom,  and  to  have  a  character  becoming 
members  of  that  holy  commonwealth."  The  form  of  the 
exhortation  shows  that  the  kingdom  the  Speaker  had  in 
view  was  not  the  theocratic  kingdom  of  popular  expecta- 
tion. In  that  case  He  would  have  said,  Seek  ye  first  the 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom,  and  only  in  the  second 
place  its  temporal  advantages ;  for  the  people  were 
seeking  the  kingdom  in  the  national  sense  already,  their 
only  fault  being  that  they  put  the  material  and  political 
aspects  of  it  before  the  moral.  That  was  in  effect  what 
the  Baptist  said.  He  assumed  that  his  hearers  desired 
the  coming  of  the  kingdom,  and  bade  them  prepare  for 
it  by  repentance  and  the  culture  of  right  conduct,  lest  its 
coming  should  prove  to  them  the  reverse  of  a  blessing. 
Christ,  on  the  other  hand,  was  conscious  that  He  had  in 
1  Matt.  vi.  33. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  89 

His  eye  a  kingdom  for  whose  advent  the  average  Jew  did 
not  long,  which,  nevertheless,  would  be  a  priceless  boon 
to  all  who  received  it.  Therefore  He  said  not  merely,  Seek 
the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom,  but.  Seek  the  kingdom 
itself  and  its  righteousness.  And  the  call,  as  already  said, 
was  a  summons  to  a  radical  repentance,  a  true  fMerdvoia, 
a  change  of  mind  not*  in  reference  to  this  or  the  other 
department  of  conduct,  but  in  reference  to  the  funda- 
mental question,  What  is  man's  chief  end  and  chief  good  ? 
Thus  understood,  the  call  to  repentance  issued  by 
Jesus  is  seen  to  be  no  arbitrary  requirement,  but  the 
indication  of  an  indispensable  condition  of  citizenship. 
If  the  kingdom  be  the  highest  conceivable  object  of 
human  aims  and  hopes,  it  ought  to  be  regarded  and 
treated  as  such ;  and  if  men  have  not  been  hitherto 
doing  that,  to  ask  them  to  do  it  is,  in  other  words,  to 
summon  them  to  repentance.  And  this  being  the 
meaning  of  the  summons,  we  further  perceive  why  it 
should  be  addressed  to  all,  as  it  was  by  Jesus.  For  it  is 
certainly  not  the  way  of  men  anywhere  to  make  the 
kingdom  of  God  of  Christ's  gospel  their  chief  end  and 
chief  good.  For  the  many  material  goods,  "food  and 
raiment,"  are  the  first  objects  of  desire.  "  After  these 
things  do  the  Gentiles  seek."  After  these  things,  it 
is  to  be  feared,  the  majority  of  Israelites  sought  more 
than  after  righteousness,  even  in  the  lower  sense  of 
right  conduct,  justice,  truth,  honesty.  There  was  there- 
fore an  urgent  need  for  repentance  even  from  the 
Baptist's  point  of  view;  and  if  his  call  had  been 
generally  responded  to,  it  would  have  brought  about 
an  immense  improvement  in  the  actual  state  of  things. 


v^ 


90  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

How  much  greater  was  the  need  of  repentance  if  man's 
chief  end  was  to  seek  the  righteousness  and  the  kingdom 
Christ  preached,  a  righteousness  of  the  heart,  a  kingdom 
of  filial  relations  with  God !  How  rare  the  men  even  in 
Israel  who  cared  supremely  or  at  all  for  these  high  matters  ! 
With  such  a  high  ideal  of  life,  we  are  not  surprised  to 
find  Christ  preaching  repentance  even  to  His  own  dis- 
ciples at  a  late  stage  of  His  intercourse  with  them.  The 
admonition  to  seek  first  the  kingdom  had  been  addressed 
principally  if  not  exclusively  to  them,  towards  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Galilean  ministry ;  and  towards  its 
close  their  Master  found  it  necessary  to  give  them  this 
more  stern  one :  "  Except  ye  turn,  and  become  as  the 
children,  ye  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  the  kingdom 
of  heaven."  ^  The  term  employed  to  denote  the  moral 
change  is  new,^  but  the  thing  insisted  on  is  the  same, 
even  a  radical  change  of  mind  with  regard  to  the  chief 
end  of  life.  It  may  indeed  appear  that  in  this  case 
it  is  rather  the  correction  of  a  special  fault,  pride  or 
ambition,  that  is  pointed  at,  than  the  great  revolution  of 
an  initial  spiritual  crisis ;  a  conversion  in  detail  rather 
than  in  principle.  Such  special  conversions  or  repent- 
ances are  to  be  looked  for  in  the  course  of  religious 
experience,  even  in  those  who  have  already  undergone 
radical  renewal ;  for  after  the  new  principle  of  life  has 
been  adopted,  it  has  to  be  worked  out  in  all  departments 
of  conduct ;  and  while  this  is  being  done,  conflicts  with 

1  Matt,  xviii.  3. 

2  (jTpa,(pyiTi.  The  compound  £7riarpi(pa  occurs  three  times  in  Luke's 
Gospel ;  twice  in  i.  16, 17,  and  in  xxii.  32.  In  Acts  the  verb  and  the 
corresponding  noun  are  used  to  denote  the  conversion  of  Gentiles 
from  Paganism  to  Christianity. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  91 

old  habits  of  thought  and  feeling  and  action  are  almost 
certain  to  occur.  It  was  to  such  a  conversion  in  detail, 
in  the  experience  of  Peter,  Jesus  alluded  when,  with 
reference  to  that  disciple's  sin  of  moral  cowardice  in 
denying  his  Master,  He  said,  "  When  thou  hast  turned, 
strengthen  thy  brethren."  ^  And  we  can  hardly  bring 
ourselves  to  believe  that  Jesus  seriously  considered  any- 
thing more  than  such  a  conversion  necessary  in  the  case 
of  men  who  had  been  so  long  with  Him,  even  when  their 
sin  was  not,  like  Peter's,  one  of  infirmity  due  to  a 
surprise,  but  a  rooted  evil  disposition  breaking  out  into 
unseemly  manifestations.  And  yet  we  may  not  shut  our 
minds  to  the  graver  alternative.  Christ  speaks  too 
strongly  to  have  in  view  merely  the  correction  of  a 
particular  fault.  He  obviously  regards  childlikeness 
not  as  a  graceful  accomplishment  of  the  citizen  of  the 
kingdom,  but  as  an  indispensable  requirement.  In 
saying,  Be  childUke,  He  is  only  saying  in  a  new  way. 
Give  the  kingdom  the  first  place.  And  when  we  con- 
sider the  matter,  we  see  that  ambition  for  distinction 
in  the  kingdom  is  only  another  way  of  committing  the 
common  sin  of  putting  the  kingdom  in  the  second  place. 
The  many  do  this  by  giving  food  and  raiment  the  first 
place  in  their  thoughts.  The  disciples,  in  forsaking  all 
for  the  kingdom,  rose  above  the  vulgar  form  of  worldli- 
ness.  But  when  they  became  supremely  concerned  about 
their  place  in  the  kingdom,  they  were  guilty  of  world- 
liness  in  a  more  refined  form.  They  made  the  interests 
of  the  kingdom  second,  and  their  own  standing  therein 
first.  Thus  we  see  that  Christ's  demand  for  the  unpre- 
1  Luke  xxii.  32. 


92  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

tentiousness  of  childhood  is  only  a  new  proof  that  in  His 
view  repentance  consisted  in  a  change  of  mind,  to  the 
effect  of  exalting  the  kingdom  to  the  place  of  supremacy. 
We  may  also  find  in  it  a  significant  hint  as  to  the  true 
nature  of  the  kingdom  and  its  righteousness.  A  kingdom 
of  God  so  conceived  of  as  to  give  rise  to  ambitious 
passions  is  not  such  in  reality,  but  a  kingdom  of  this 
world.  The  utmost  devotion  to  such  a  counterfeit  does 
not  amount  to  compliance  with  the  demand,  Seek  first 
the  kingdom.  For  that  there  is  needed  not  only  zeal  but 
pure  motive ;  and  the  kingdom  is  there  only  where  zeal 
and  motive  coalesce,  zeal  excluding  impurity  of  motive, 
and  purity  of  motive  guaranteeing  the  due  measure  of 
zeal.  The  kingdom  of  God  is  a  kingdom  of  love  from 
which  selfishness  in  every  form  is  excluded ;  not  merely 
the  mitigated  selfishness  of  concern  about  animal  wants, 
but  the  intenser  though  subtler  selfishness  of  egotism 
and  vainglory.  Hence  it  follows  that  there  may  be 
much  religious  activity,  making  a  great  display  of  zeal 
and  gaining  golden  opinions,  which  has  no  relation  to 
the  kingdom  of  God,  except  it  be  one  of  antagonism, 
and  no  more  makes  us  children  of  the  kingdom  than 
does  the  struggle  for  existence  amid  the  secular  call- 
ings of  life.  The  struggle  for  religious  name  and 
church  place  and  power  may  be  more  respectable  than 
the  struggle  for  physical  livelihood,  but  it  is  not  less, 
but  rather  more,  ungodly.  It  deepens  our  reverence 
for  Christ  as  a  sjjiritual  Teacher  that  He  said  this 
quite  plainly,  and  even  with  passionate  emphasis ; 
not  slurring  over  the  vices  of  disciples,  while  loudly 
denouncing  the  vulgar  worldliness  of  the  multitude. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTKANCE.  93 

Of  this  also,  however,  He  was  wont  to  speak  faithfully, 
as  we  learn  from  His  bitter  complaint  against  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  towns  lying  along  the  shores  of  the  Galilean 
lake  among  whom  He  mainly  exercised  His  ministry. 
It  was  to  the  effect  that  they  repented  not,  though  such 
mighty  works  had  been  done  among  them  as  might  have 
moved  even  Tyre  and  Sidon  and  Sodom  to  repentance.^ 
The  charge  is  significant  as  confirmatory  of  the  view  I 
have  given  of  the  sense  in  which  Christ  used  the  word. 
The  inhabitants  of  the  plain  of  Gennesareth  are  not 
accused  of  being  sinners  like  the  men  of  Sodom ;  that 
ancient  city  is  rather  referred  to  as  the  extreme  instance 
of  sensual  wickedness,  in  comparison  with  which  the 
people  by  the  Galilean  Sea  might  justly  deem  themselves 
exemplary.  What  then  was  their  fault  ?  It  was  that 
the  mighty  deeds  of  the  Christ  had  not  led  them  to  give 
the  kingdom  its  place  of  supremacy.  They  had  been 
much  interested  in  these  deeds  ;  they  had  followed  the 
Uoer  with  eager  curiosity  and  intense  admiration ;  they 
had  even  been  willing,  according  to  an  intimation  in  the 
fourth  Gospel,  to  make  Him  their  King,  and  so  set  up 
the  Messianic  kingdom.^  Still  they  remained  essentially 
as  they  had  been  before,  greatly  more  concerned  about 
food  and  raiment  than  about  righteousness  and  the 
kingdom  of  God  in  the  true  sense  of  the  words.  Their 
state  was  that  so  graphically  depicted  in  the  words  Christ 
is  represented  as  addressing  to  the  multitude  at  Caper- 
naum by  the  fourth  evangelist :  "  Ye  seek  me,  not 
because  ye  saw  the  signs,  but  because  ye  did  eat  of  the 
loaves  and  were  filled ; "  "  Busy  not  yourselves  about  the 
1  Matt.  xi.  20-24.  ^  John  vi.  15. 


94  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

food  that  perisheth,  but  about  the  food  that  endureth 
unto  eternal  life."  ^  From  such  words,  as  from  those 
addressed  to  the  disciples  at  a  later  date,  the  plain 
inference  is  that  repentance  as  preached  by  Jesus  was  a 
very  high  requirement  indeed,  with  which  few  complied 
in  a  manner  He  deemed  satisfactory. 

Though  mentioned  here  in  the  second  place,  after 
repentance,  faith  was  in  reality  the  first  and  chief  con- 
dition of  admission  to  the  kingdom  in  the  teaching  of 
Jesus.  Faith  was  a  great  word  with  Him,  and  through 
Him  it  became  a  great  word  in  the  New  Testament 
literature,  the  watchword  of  the  era  of  grace,  so  that  it 
might  also  be  called  the  era  of  faith.  Christ  was  Him- 
self emphatically  a  man  of  faith.  He  lived  a  life  of 
perfect  holiness  by  faith  in  His  heavenly  Father.  He 
wrought  His  miracles  by  faith.  He  demanded  faith  in 
others  as  the  condition  of  His  ability  to  work  miracles 
for  their  benefit.  He  regarded  faith  as  an  almighty 
power  by  which  not  only  He  but  any  of  His  disciples 
could  do  wonders,  and  without  which  nothing  great 
could  be  accomplished.  He  was  grieved  by  manifesta- 
tions of  unbelief  or  weak  faith;  from  exhibitions  of 
strong  faith  He  derived  intense  pleasure.  He  had 
unbounded  confidence  in  faith's  virtue  within  the  moral 
sphere  as  a  recuperative  influence,  raising  the  fallen, 
sanctifying  the  sinful,  restoring  peace  to  the  troubled 
conscience.  He  commended  trust  in  their  heavenly  Father 
to  His  followers  as  the  best  religious  service  they  could 
render,  and  as  an  infallible  specific  against  fear  and 
care. 

1  John  vi.  26,  27. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  95 

All  this  was  significant  of  a  new  departure.  The  pro- 
minence given  to  faith  denotes  a  new  way  of  conceiving 
the  kingdom.  "  Eepent,"  the  Baptist's  watchword,  suits 
one  idea  of  it.  "  Believe,"  Christ's  watchword,  suits  and 
implies  another  and  very  different  one.  "  Eepent "  is  the 
appropriate  word  when  the  kingdom  is  conceived  of  as  the 
reward  of  legal  righteousness  ;  "  believe"  is  the  more  appro- 
priate word  when  the  kingdom  is  conceived  of  as  a  gift 
of  grace  to  be  conferred  on  all  who  are  simply  willing  to 
receive  it.  In  the  one  case  the  message  to  be  delivered 
to  men  is,  "  Conform  your  lives  to  the  law,  that  you  may 
hope  to  obtain  the  honours  of  membership  in  the  holy 
commonwealth ; "  in  the  other  it  is,  "  The  kingdom  of 
grace  is  here,  God  is  come  to  dwell  among  men  in  the 
plenitude  of  His  love ;  make  the  kingdom  welcome,  and 
it  will  make  you  welcome."  To  comply  with  this  invi- 
tation, and  to  receive  the  kingdom  as  offered,  is  to  believe  ; 
faith  needs  no  better  definition :  it  consists  in  spiritual 
receptivity.  And  the  kingdom  being  such  as  described, 
not  a  mere  kingdom  of  law  in  which  God  appears  making 
demands,  but  first  of  all,  a  kingdom  of  grace  in  which  God 
appears  freely  bestowing  benefits,  it  is  clear  that  recep- 
tivity is  not  only  a  suitable  attitude,  but  an  indispensable 
one.  The  kingdom  being  a  gift,  the  one  thing  needful  is 
that  it  be  received.  This  indispensable  requirement  is 
happily  one  within  the  reach  of  all.  The  gospel  of  a 
kingdom  so  conceived  as  to  require  only  faith,  is  a  gospel 
for  the  million.  The  announcement  that  the  kingdom 
was  approaching,  made  by  the  Baptist,  was  a  gospel  or 
good  tidings  only  to  the  few  who  were  righteous,  or  who 
had  strength  of  will  to  reform  their  lives  in  obedience  to 


96  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

a  mere  legal  demand.  Christ's  announcement  of  a  king- 
dom that  had  simply  to  be  received,  was  a  gospel  for  all ; 
for  sinners  not  less  than  for  saints,  for  them  even  chiefly 
or  very  expressly.  He  came,  as  He  Himself  said, 
signalizing  this  fact,  "not  to  call  righteous  ones,  but 
sinners  ; "  He  came  calling  sinners,  not  "  to  repentance  " 
merely,  according  to  the  expanded  form  of  the  saying  as 
given  by  Luke,^  but  generally  to  participation  in  all  the 
benefits  of  the  kingdom.  If  we  must  add  an  interpretative 
gloss  to  the  original  word,  the  more  appropriate  one 
would  be  "to  faith."  For  the  kingdom  of  Christ's 
Evangel  was  such  that  what  men  had  to  do  first  of 
all  was  to  receive  it  as  a  boon,  and  sinners  had  the  best 
reasons  for  being  ready  to  do  that. 

The  adoption  of  faith  as  the  new  watchword  was, 
moreover,  a  prophecy  of  Christian  universalism.  A 
Divine  kingdom  addressing  itself  to  faith  is  likely  not 
only  to  go  down  to  the  lowest  moral  depths  of  Jewish 
society  that  it  may  raise  the  low  and  lost  to  heavenly 
heights,  but  also  to  overleap  the  geographical  boundaries 
of  Palestine  and  become  a  world-wide  phenomenon.  The 
word  "  repent  "  holds  out  little  hope  to  those  outside  the 
pale.  It  is  spoken  most  fitly  to  a  covenanted  people  for 
whom  God  had  done  much,  and  from  whom  therefore  He 
demands  much.  The  preacher  of  repentance  by  the 
banks  of  the  Jordan  thinks  naturally  only  of  the  children 
of  Abraham,  and  his  summons  refers  exclusively  to 
theocratic  privileges  and  obligations.  But  when  one 
comes  preaching /fti77z,,  He  may  readily  have  the  Gentiles 

^  Luke  V.  32.     The  slg  f^sTxi/oixu  of  Luke's  text  is  a  false  reading 
in  the  other  Gospels  introduced  for  the  purpose  of  assimilation. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  97 

in  view.  For  though  they  too  have  abundant  cause  for 
repentance,  they  have  sinned  in  ignorance,  and  are  more 
fitly  objects  of  compassion  than  of  wrath.  They  need 
grace,  and  if  they  are  to  have  any  part  in  the  kingdom, 
their  first  duty  will  be  to  believe  in  grace,  and  possibly 
they  may  develop  no  mean  capacity  for  believing.  Why 
should  not  the  Preacher  of  a  kingdom  addressing  itself  to 
faith  have  these  thoughts  present  to  His  mind  ?  Nay, 
how  could  He  fail  to  have  the  Gentiles  in  His  view  if  He 
realized  the  import  of  His  own  programme  ? 

The  Gospel  history  supplies  abundant  evidence  that 
Christ  fully  understood  the  scope  of  His  doctrine  of 
faith  in  all  directions.  Specially  significant  in  this  con- 
nection are  the  three  narratives,  of  the  woman  "  who  was 
a  sinner,"  the  Eoman  centurion,  and  the  woman  of  Syro- 
Phcenicia.^  The  first  shows  Christ's  estimate  of  the 
power  of  faith  as  a  redemptive  force ;  the  other  two 
reveal  His  consciousness  that  before  faith  all  barriers  of 
race,  rite,  or  election  must  go  down.  The  woman  who 
entered  into  Simon's  house  Jesus  assumed  to  be  a  great 
sinner  ;  nay,  held  her  proved  to  be,  by  the  very  intensity 
of  her  love  to  Himself  as  exhibited  in  her  remarkable 
behaviour.  From  the  great  love  He  inferred  a  great  need 
of  forgiveness.  Yet  He  had  perfect  confidence  in  the 
power  of  faith  to  "  save "  her,  to  make  her  happy  and 
good.  "  Thy  faith  hath  saved  thee,"  He  said  to  her  at 
parting;  "go  into  peace."  In  what  had  just  taken 
place  He  saw  the  process  of  salvation  begun,  and  even 
virtually  completed.     Faith  in  the  good  tidings  we  may 

1  Luke  vii.  36-50  ;  Matt.  viii.  5-13 ;  Luke  vii.  1-10 ;  Matt.  xv. 
21-28  ;  Mark  vii.  24-30. 

G 


98  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

assume  she  had  heard  Him  preach,  for  "  faith  cometh  by 
hearing,"  had  led  her  to  believe  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins, 
and  to  cherish  hope  of  being  able  by  Heaven's  help  to 
live  a  useful,  pure  life  for  the  future.  The  very  sight  of 
Him  had  been  a  gospel  to  the  heart  of  this  fallen  one, 
revealing  an  infinite  depth  of  tender,  pure  sympathy  with 
the  like  of  her  which  touched  the  remnants  of  true 
womanhood  in  her,  and  made  sensual  impulses  seem 
hateful.  And  now  here  she  was  in  His  presence,  suitable 
occasion  offering,  her  heart  bursting  with  gratitude  for 
benefit  received,  and  demonstrating  by  a  series  of  extra- 
ordinary actions  her  pure  though  passionate  affection  for 
her  Saviour.  What  better  evidence  could  one  desire  of 
faith's  power  than  the  moral  transformation  actually 
effected  :  a  sinner  turned  into  a  penitent,  a  harlot  into  a 
devotee ;  the  shameless  one  raised  above  the  shame  which 
keeps  men  from  doing  noble  actions,  and  become  a  heroine 
who  can  defy  conventional  proprieties  at  the  bidding  of 
the  heart  ?  Here  was  a  last  one  become  first:  in  the 
very  first  passages  of  her  new  life  leaving  Simon  the 
Pharisee  far  behind — his  behaviour  towards  his  guest, 
compared  with  hers,  seeming  cold  and  mean.  It  was 
with  these  things  in  view  that  Jesus  declared,  surely  not 
without  reason,  that  faith  had  saved  that  woman.  True, 
the  new  life  was  only  begun,  and  there  were  many  risks 
ahead.  Many  conversions  are  only  temporary,  and  early 
enthusiasms  are  too  often  followed  by  lamentable  falls. 
Jesus  knew  all  that  full  well ;  but  He  was  not  a  Pharisee, 
therefore  He  deemed  it  better  to  speak  a  generous  word 
than  to  offer  cold  advices,  to  sympathize  than  to  caution. 
He  believed  that  faith,  and  what  faith  feeds  on,  redeeming 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTEANCE.  99 

love  in  God  and  man,  is  the  best  preservative  against 
apostasy,  and  that  when  it  fails  no  other  influences  will 
be  of  much  avail.  Nor  did  He  send  the  penitent  away 
with  that  cheering  sympathetic  word,  from  mere  motives 
of  prudence.  He  spoke  from  conviction,  as  cherishing 
strong  hopes  for  the  future  of  the  erring  one.  He  saw 
no  reason  in  the  evil  past  for  despair.  He  believed  it 
possible  for  great  offenders  permanently  to  forsake  wicked 
ways  and  rise  to  great  heights  of  sanctity.  He  even 
expected  such,  once  changed,  to  rise  highest.  Therefore 
it  was  that  He  spent  so  much  of  His  time  among  the 
outcasts.  He  expected  to  find  there  the  best  citizens  of 
the  kingdom.  The  motto,  "  Much  forgiveness,  much  love," 
was  part  of  His  apology  for  His  sympathetic  relations 
with  the  class  of  which  the  woman  "  who  was  a  sinner  " 
was  a  sample.  The  confidence  He  expressed  in  her  case 
was  not  the  result  of  a  momentary  generous  impulse. 
It  embodied  a  fixed  principle  on  which  He  acted  all 
through  His  ministry.  "  It  is  faith  that  saves,  it  can 
save  the  lowest,  it  can  save  them  most  conspicuously," — 
such  was  the  cheering,  hopeful  creed  of  Jesus  Christ. 

In  the  light  of  that  creed  we  understand  why  Jesus 
said  so  much  less  about  repentance  than  about  faith. 
He  believed  that  faith  would  do  the  work  of  repentance, 
that  indeed  it  bore  repentance  in  its  bosom.  And  when 
we  recall  His  definition  of  repentance,  we  perceive  that 
the  fact  is  even  so.  Eepentance  means  a  change  of  mind 
consisting  in  the  recognition  of  the  kingdom  as  the  chief 
end  of  man.  But  faith,  we  have  found,  means  the  recep- 
tion of  the  same  kingdom  as  the  highest  good,  the  sum 
of  all  blessedness  bestowed  on  men  as  a  free  gift  from 


100  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

God.  Evidently,  then,  the  reception  of  the  boon  by 
faith  is  the  most  direct  way  to  the  goal  aimed  at  in 
repentance,  the  exaltation  of  the  kingdom  and  its  interests 
to  the  place  of  supremacy.  And  the  repentance  thus 
brought  about  is  altogether  wholesome ;  not  legal  but 
evangelic,  not  compulsory  but  spontaneous  ;  not  a  habit 
of  sadness  as  if  doing  eternal  penance  for  the  j)ast,  but  a 
turning  of  the  moral  energies  in  a  new  direction  in  cheer- 
fulness and  hope,  letting  the  dead  past  bury  its  dead. 
In  this  way,  not  after  the  rueful  manner  of  the  Baptist 
circle,  would  Jesus  have  His  disciples  repent.  What 
He  said  to  the  palsied  man,  He  virtually  said  to  all: 
"  Courage,  child,  thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee."  ^  He 
summoned  penitents  not  to  fasting  but  to  service,  such 
as  that  of  the  women  who  followed  Him  and  ministered 
to  Him  of  their  substance.^  She  that  had  been  a  sinner 
probably  joined  that  company,  and  that  was  the  way  by 
which  she  entered  into  peace. 

In  the  cases  of  the  Eoman  centurion  and  the  woman 
of  Syro-Phoenicia,  the  faith  manifested,  though  in  both 
instances  eliciting  the  admiration  and  praise  of  Jesus, 
was  less  obviously  of  the  kind  that  "  saves."  The  benefit 
sought  in  both  cases  was  physical,  and  the  faith  exercised 
in  seeking  it  seems  rather  a  capacity  for  uttering  bright 
sayings,  and  the  eulogy  called  forth  appears  to  be  homage 
done  to  genius  under  another  name.  There  is  certainly 
something  to  be  learned  from  these  narratives  concerning 
the  psychology  of  faith  as  conceived  by  Jesus.  Obviously 
He  did  not  regard  faith  as  an  isolated  faculty  separate 
from  reason,  and  still  less  as  opposed  to  reason,  but 
1  Matt.  ix.  2.  2  L^ii^e  viii.  1-3. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  101 

rather  as  a  function  of  the  whole  mind  exercised  on 
religion.  Those  whom.  He  accounted  great  in  faith  were 
thus  likely  to  be  interesting  people,  in  all  respects  far 
from  commonplace  either  intellectually  or  morally ;  and 
in  fact  it  is  evident  that  all  the  three  chief  characters  in 
the  incidents  under  consideration,  the  sinful  woman,  the 
centurion,  and  the  Syro-Phoenician,  were  as  far  as  possible 
from  being  commonplace.  There  was  an  element  of 
genius  and  heroism  in  them  all;  a  talent  for  doing 
uncommon  actions,  for  thinking  great  thoughts,  for 
uttering  sparkling,  witty  words.  And  the  truth  is, 
whatever  prejudice  may  exist  to  the  contrary,  faith  is 
always  a  heroic  quality,  by  no  means  a  prosaic  home- 
spun virtue  likely  to  be  most  conspicuous  in  persons  of 
dull  minds,  and  characterized  by  moral  mediocrity.  As 
to  the  physical  nature  of  the  benefit,  Jesus  did  not  view 
it  in  isolation  any  more  than  the  faculty  of  faith.  His 
idea  seems  to  have  been,  that  as  faith  in  its  acting  main- 
tains solidarity  with  all  the  mental  powers,  so  all  its 
acts  are  in  solidarity  with  each  other.  Capacity  to 
believe  in  one  direction  implies  capacity  to  believe  in 
all  directions. 

While  intellect  was  conspicuously  active  in  the  cen- 
turion and  in  the  Syro-Phoenician  woman,  faith  in  the 
ethical  and  religious  sense  also  revealed  itself  in  no 
ordinary  degree.  The  saying  of  the  centurion,  besides 
indicating  deep  humility,  showed  strong  faith  in  the 
power  and  the  will  of  the  Divine  Being,  as  represented 
by  Jesus,  to  interpose  in  the  world's  affairs  as  a  helper 
of  men  in  their  needs.  It  is  true,  any  one  not  inclined 
to  think  well  of  Pagans  might  very  easily  detract  from 


102  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  merit  of  the  striking  word  which  compared  Christ  to 
a  general  or  imperator,  by  representing  it  as  the  com- 
bined product  of  Eoman  military  discipline  and  Eoman 
religious  superstition.^  But  the  centurion's  faith  is 
thus  made  less  remarkable  in  one  aspect,  only  to  become 
more  significant  in  another  direction.  If  Christ's  praise 
was  exaggerated,  it  but  the  more  conspicuously  evinces 
his  'pliilo-Pagan  spirit,  and  raises  the  hope  that  the 
generous  eye  of  Heaven  may  detect  traces  of  faith  in 
the  hearts  of  benighted  heathens  dimly  groping  after  the 
true  God,  where  narrow-souled  men  judging  by  dogmatic 
tests  would  discover  none.  We  may  safely  assume, 
however,  that  the  praise,  while  generous,  as  was  always 
Christ's  way,  was  in  the  main  deserved.  In  that  case 
the  centurion's  faith,  as  that  of  a  Pagan, — for  such  we 
may  regard  him,  even  if,  as  is  probable  from  Luke's 
narrative,^  he  had  become  a  Jewish  proselyte, — possesses 
peculiar  value  as  foreshadowing  the  universal  destination 
of  the  kingdom.  Here  on  heathen  soil,  so  to  speak,  is  a 
faith  which  on  Christ's  own  testimony  eclipses  any  to  be 
seen  in  Israel.  It  is  a  melancholy,  although  not  a  surpris- 
ing fact,  as  it  concerns  Israel.  Here  is  a  people  which  has 
had  a  very  long  and  careful  training  in  religion,  and  has 
busied  itself  very  much  with  religion.  And  the  result  is 
that  the  faith-faculty  has  almost  died  out  within  it ;  has 
been  killed  out  by  Eabbinism,  which  can  believe  in  no 
new  revelations,  but  only  in  old  revelations  overgrown  by 
the  moss  of  centuries.     There  is  a  better  chance  of  learn- 

^  Weiss  characterizes  the   centurion's  idea  as    "certainly  very 
superstitious  "  {Leben  Jesu,  i.  p.  425). 
^  Luke  vii.  5. 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  103 

ing  what  faith  can  be  and  do  by  going  outside  the  Jewish 
pale.  Verily  a  thing  of  evil  omen  for  the  elect  race. 
For  if  the  kingdom  addresses  itself  to  faith,  and  if  faith 
be  forthcoming  among  Pagans  more  readily  than  among 
Israelites,  will  it  not  forsake  the  sacred  soil  and  step 
forth  into  the  Gentile  world,  going  where  it  meets  with 
a  hearty  welcome  ?  The  reflection  forces  itself  on  our 
minds,  and  it  is  nowise  unlikely  that  it  suggested  itself 
to  Jesus  and  found  expression  in  the  words :  "  Many 
shall  come  from  the  east  and  west,  and  shall  sit  down 
with  Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  kingdom  of 
heaven ;  but  the  children  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  cast 
out."  ^  The  truth  that  the  gospel  is  for  the  world  is  not 
expressed  here  as  Paul  expressed  it.  The  kingdom  does 
not  go  to  the  Pagans,  the  Pagans  come  to  the  kingdom, 
localized  in  the  Holy  Land.  But  the  day  -  dawn  of 
Christian  universalism  is  manifestly  here. 

In  the  case  of  the  Syro -Phoenician  woman  the  dawn 
grows  brighter.  Here  also  there  is  a  double  interest, 
a  personal  interest  connected  with  the  unfolding  of  a 
striking  human  character,  and  the  didactic  interest  con- 
nected with  the  fact  that  the  heroine  was  a  Pagan.  We 
all  feel  the  charm  of  the  story.  The  pathos,  humour, 
and  meekness  blended  together  in  the  pleadings  of  this 
Syrian  mother  for  her  afflicted  daughter  conquer  every 
Christian  heart.  Had  the  narative  told  that  Jesus 
persisted  in  His  refusal,  it   would  have   been  hard  for 

1  Matt.  viii.  11.  This  saying  is  given  by  Luke  in  another  con- 
nection (xiii.  28,  29),  and  we  cannot  be  sure  that  Matthew  places  it 
in  its  original  position.  But  as  it  stands  in  his  Gospel  it  suits  well 
the  occasion. 


104  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

US  to   have   borne    it.     But  there  was  no  risk  of  that 
happening.     Not  that  Jesus  was  not  in  earnest  in  the 
declaration  made  to  His  disciples  that  His  vocation  was 
to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel.     He  meant  that 
seriously,  and  then  and  always  acted  on  it.     But  faith 
made  all  the  difference.     Faith  anywhere  and  everywhere 
must  be  respected.     Jesus  accordingly  did  respect  faith 
in  this  instance,  and  in  the  light  of  His  ultimate  com- 
pliance with  the  woman's  request,  His  rule  of  conduct 
becomes  modified  thus :    Israel  my  ordinary  care,  with 
exceptions  made  in  favour  of  faith.      In  Christ's  own 
lifetime  the  exceptions  were  few,  but  these  exceptions, 
and  the  one  before  us  in  particular,  were  prophetic  of  a 
time  when  the  exception  would  become  the  rule.     For 
Christian    universalism    was    immanent    in     the    Syro- 
Phoenician's    faith ;     therein   lay   its    profound   religious 
significance.     When  she  said  meekly  and  wittily,  "  We 
are  Gentile  dogs,  yet  there  is  a  portion  even  for  the  dogs 
of  the  household  crouching  below  the  family  table,"  she 
expressed    by   implication   her    belief    that    the    barrier 
between  Jew  and  Gentile  was  not  insurmountable,  that 
election  did  not  exclude  the  outside  world  from  all  share 
in   Divine   compassion,  that   Heaven's   grace   could    not 
possibly  be  confined  within  certain  geographical  bound- 
aries.     She   said   in   effect   what    Paul   said   afterwards, 
"  God   is   not  the   God   of  the   Jews   only,   but   of   the 
Gentiles  also ; "  with  him,  she  ascribed  to  God's  love  a 
length  and  breadth  wide  as  the  world.      Her  faith  filled 
up  the  deep  ravine  of  Pagan  unworthiness,  and  levelled 
the  mountain  range  of   election  which   separated   Jews 
from  Gentiles,  and  made  a  straight  way  for  the  kingdom 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTEANCE.  105 

with  its  blessings  even  into  Syro-Phoenicia.  All  this 
Jesus  understood,  and  all  this  He  had  in  view  in  granting 
the  request.  His  ultimate  compliance  was  not  a  merely 
exceptional  favour  to  a  Pagan  out  of  regard  to  a  most 
unusual  spiritual  insight.  It  was  a  virtual  proclamation 
that  before  faith  all  partition  walls  must  fall,  that  wher- 
ever there  is  recipiency  the  blessings  of  the  kingdom 
must  be  communicated,  irrespective  of  race,  rite,  or 
peculiar  privilege.  It  was  an  anticipation  of  the  position 
taken  up  by  the  Apostolic  Church  in  Jerusalem,  when, 
in  deference  to  undeniable  facts,  its  members  said,  "  Then 
hath  God  also  to  the  Gentiles  granted  repentance  unto 
life."  In  their  case  it  was  a  reluctant  acknowledgment 
in  which  deeply-rooted  prejudice  yielded  to  the  force 
of  events.  One  may  feel  disappointment  that  in  this 
respect  there  is  the  appearance  of  a  resemblance  between 
their  attitude  and  that  of  Jesus  on  this  occasion.  It 
is  natural  to  wish  that  His  universalism  had  been  as 
pronounced  and  as  undeniable  as  that  of  Paul,  by  the 
side  of  which  his  reluctant  yielding  to  the  pressure  of 
importunate  faith  wears  an  aspect  of  provincial  narrow- 
ness. But  that  could  not  be.  However  like  Paul  in 
spirit  and  conviction,  Jesus  could  not  but  be  more 
reserved  in  utterance  and  in  action.  Eespect  was  due 
to  the  law  of  development.  Bright  day  is  ushered  in  by 
the  grey  dim  dawn.  It  was  good  and  wholesome  that 
the  day  of  grace  should  thus  gradually  steal  on.  The 
public  action  of  Jesus  was  guided  by  this  consideration. 
In  confining  His  activities  to  Israel,  He  was  exercising  a 
self-restraint  which  was  a  veritable  part  of  His  earthly 
humiliation.     How  real   the   self-restraint  was,  appears 


106  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

from  the  heartiness  and  even  eagerness  with  which 
exception  was  made  on  good  cause  shown.  In  the  case 
of  the  Syro-Phcenician  woman,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
Eoman  centurion,  it  would  have  been  very  easy  for  an 
illiberal  churlish  Jew  to  have  minimized  the  merit  of  the 
words  spoken.  It  is  always  easy  to  put  a  sinister  con- 
struction on  the  conduct  of  people  we  dislike.  Good 
qualities  may  be  turned  into  their  opposites :  humility 
into  impudence,  genial  wit  into  mere  pertness.  Christ 
saw  in  that  woman  nothing  that  was  not  there ;  never- 
theless He  saw  what  He  was  very  willing  to  see ;  what 
no  scribe,  rabbi,  or  Pharisee  would  ever  have  discovered. 
It  was  once  asked  with  reference  to  Himself,  "  Can  any 
good  thing  come  out  of  Nazareth  ?  "  That  He  was  not 
inclined  to  ask,  "  Can  any  good  thing  come  out  of 
heathendom  ? "  His  admiring  exclamation,  "  0  woman, 
great  is  thy  faith ! "  ^  very  sufficiently  demonstrates. 
Though  He  did  not  say  it.  He  doubtless  felt  that  here 
again  was  a  faith  the  like  of  which  was  not  to  be  found 
in  Israel.  The  remark  might  have  been  made  with  even 
more  justice  than  in  the  case  of  the  centurion.  Faith 
was  a  scarce  commodity  in  Israel  in  any  form ;  and  what 
there  was  of  it  was  of  a  homeward-bound  character — 
faith  in  a  grace  available  for  the  chosen  race,  but  not  for 
those   beyond   the   pale.      Here,  on   Pagan   soil,  on  the 

1  Matt.  XV.  28.  Mark's  version  is  less  gushing  :  "  For  this  saying 
go  thy  way  "  (vii.  29).  The  meaning  is  the  same.  Tlie  gush  comes 
out  in  action  :  "  The  devil  is  gone  out  of  thy  daughter."  It  is 
noticeable  that  the  harshness  of  Christ's  refusal  is  softened  in  Mark's 
account  by  the  introduction  of  the  words  :  "Let  the  children  first 
be  filled  "(vii.  27).  This  sounds  like  an  echo  of  Paul's  :  "To  the 
Jew  first,  and  also  to  the  Gentile." 


THE  CONDITIONS  OF  ENTRANCE.  107 

contrary,  was  a  faith  remarkable  not  only  for  its  bright- 
ness and  strength,  but  for  its  spiritual  enlightenment 
and  width  of  horizon ;  accepting  as  a  truism  what  to  the 
ordinary  Jew  seemed  all  but  incredible,  that  there  was 
hope  in  God  even  for  Gentiles. 

After  the  foregoing  observations,  it  can  hardly  be 
necessary  to  point  out  that,  in  the  view  of  Christ,  faitli 
was  not  only  the  necessary  but  the  sufficient  condition 
of  admission  to  the  kingdom.  "  Faith  alone "  was  a 
motto  for  Christ  not  less  than  for  Paul.  Faith  alone 
with  reference  to  repentance,  because  including  it ;  faith 
alone  with  reference  to  circumcision  and  the  like 
externalities,  because  rendering  them  utterly  meaningless. 
Faith  alone  sufficed  in  the  case  of  the  Syro-Phoenician 
mother  and  her  daughter.  The  mother  came  to  Jesus  a 
Pagan,  and  she  returned  to  her  home  a  Pagan,  yet  with 
a  blessing  for  herself  and  for  her  afflicted  child.  It  is 
true,  indeed,  that  faith  obtained,  apparently,  only  the 
dog's  portion,  a  crumb  of  healing  for  a  diseased  body. 
Might  it  not  suffice  for  that,  yet  fail  to  obtain  the  full 
benefits  of  citizenship  in  the  holy  commonwealth  without 
the  aid  of  some  supplementary  qualification,  such  as,  for 
example,  circumcision  ?  No,  for  there  is  solidarity  in 
the  benefits  procurable  by  faith,  as  well  as  in  faith's 
actings.  The  law  of  solidarity  prevails  all  round.  The 
soul  exerts  all  its  energies  in  believing ;  faith's  individual 
acts  all  hang  together ;  God's  gifts  to  faith  go  in  a  body. 
If  anything  is  given,  all  is  given.  Faith  makes  the  dog 
a  child,  and  gets  a  share  not  only  of  the  crumbs  below 
the  table,  but  of  all  the  viands  on  the  table.  That  is 
the  law  of  the  kingdom.      Kecipiency  is  the  sole  require- 


108  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

merit.  External  conditions  can  have  no  place  in  reference 
to  the  Highest  Good.  Existing  restrictions  are  only 
economical  and  temporary,  and  a  sign  that  the  era  of 
spiritual  reality  is  not  yet  come.  The  behaviour  of  Jesus 
towards  the  Pagans  mentioned  in  the  Gospels  shows  that 
He  was  of  this  mind. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

CHRIST'S  DOCTRINE  OF  GOD. 

In  passing  from  the  Old  Testament  to  the  Gospels,  we 
find  God  spoken  of  under  a  new  name.  The  Jehovah  of 
Israel  is  replaced  by  the  Divine  Father  of  men.  An 
ancient  reading  of  Matt.  xi.  27,  of  earlier  date  than  the 
oldest  of  extant  manuscripts,  made  Jesus  claim  to  be  the 
revealer  of  God  in  His  paternal  character.  "No  man 
knew  the  Father  save  the  Son."  The  claim  is  valid, 
independently  of  doubtful  readings  of  evangelic  texts. 
The  "  only-begotten "  was  the  first  effective  exegete  of 
God  as  Father.  He  declared  Him  so  that  the  name 
Father  took  its  place  in  human  speech  as  the  Christian 
name  for  the  Divine  Being.  The  declaration  was  an 
essential  part  of  the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom.  The  title 
Father  is  the  appropriate  name  of  God  in  the  kingdom 
of  grace,  for  it  is  the  kingdom  of  fatherly  love. 

The  doctrine  was  not  absolutely  new^ ;  like  every  other 
Christian  doctrine,  it  had  its  root  in  the  Old  Testament. 
But  it  was  new  in  emphasis.  It  was  also  new  in  respect 
to  the  relation  the  name  Father  was  employed  to  express. 
In  Old  Testament  dialect  the  epithet  expressed  a  relation 
of  God  to  the  chosen  nation,  or  to  its  earthly  sovereign, 
Jehovah's  vicegerent.     Israel  or  Israel's  King  was  God's 

109 


110  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Son.  But  Christ  placed  God  in  a  paternal  relation  to 
individuals,  and  represented  Him  as  the  Father  of  the 
human  spirit.  It  was  in  one  sense  a  doctrine  as  old  as 
Genesis,  where  it  is  taught  that  man  was  made  in  God's 
image.  But  it  was  the  old  doctrine  with  a  marked 
difference.  The  man  made  in  God's  image,  of  the  Book 
of  Origins,  is  an  ideal  man  untainted  by  moral  evil. 
But  Jesus  said :  God  is  the  Father  of  men,  sin  notwith- 
standing.^ He  said  this  not  merely  with  reference  to 
the  best  men  in  whom  moral  evil  appeared  in  the  most 
mitigated  form,  the  people  of  culture  and  character,  but 
even  with  reference  to  the  most  depraved  and  degraded. 
The  God  He  preached  is  Father  not  only  of  those  whoi 
by  His  grace  have  become  citizens  of  the  Divine  king-,' 
dom,  but  also  of  those  who  are  without.  The  doctrine! 
concerned  both  sinners  and  saints,  and  was  proclaimed 
to  all  on  highway  or  in  market-place,  irrespective  of 
social  or  moral  antecedents. 

But  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  as  announced  by  Jesus, 
while  having  reference  to  all,  does  not  necessarily  mean 
the  same  thing  for  all.  God  cannot,  any  more  than  an 
earthly  parent,  be  a  Father  to  His  prodigal  children  to 
the  same  effect  as  to  sons  who  dwell  in  His  house  and 
regard  Him  with  trust,  reverence,  and  love.  The  full 
benefit  of  Divine  Fatherhood  can  only  be  experienced 
where  there  is  a  filial  attitude  and  spiritual  receptivity. 
The  will  to  bless  may  be  in  the  Father's  heart,  yet  be 

1  The  idea  that  God  is  the  Father  of  the  just  man  occurs  in  the 
Wisdom  of  Solomon  ii.  16-18  :  "  He  blesseth  the  end  of  the  just, 
and  boasts  that  God  is  his  Father.  Let  us  see  if  his  words  be  true, 
and  let  us  try  his  end.  For  if  the  just  be  the  son  of  God,  He  will 
take  his  part,  and  deliver  him  from  the  hands  of  his  foes." 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  Ill 

frustrated  by  unbelief  or  alienation.  Hence,  in  studying 
the  doctrine  of  God's  paternal  love,  we  must  have  regard 
to  moral  distinctions.  We  must  ask  ourselves  what  it 
means  for  sinners,  and  what  for  saints ;  for  men  in 
general  on  the  one  hand,  for  the  children  of  the  kingdom 
on  the  other.  We  shall  find  that  the  words  of  Jesus 
supply  us  with  materials  for  answering  both  questions. 

The  Fatherhood  of  God  in  both  relations  has  two 
aspects,  a  providential  and  a  gracious ;  the  one  referring 
to  the  temporal  interests  of  men,  the  other  to  the  higher 
interests  of  the  soul.  The  paternal  Providence  of  God  '^ 
over  all  is  taught  in  that  word  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount,  in  which  the  Father  in  heaven  is  represented  as 
making  His  sun  rise  upon  evil  and  good,  and  sending 
rain  on  just  and  unjust.^  This  part  of  Christ's  doctrine 
is  not  so  much  a  new  revelation  as  a  reversion  to  a 
simple  truth  of  natural  religion.  ISTature  itself  teaches 
men  to  think  of  the  Maker  and  Sustainer  of  the  world 
as  a  parent  who  gives  to  his  children  their  daily  bread. 
The  Vedic  Indians,  with  this  thought  in  their  mind, 
worshipped  Dyaus-pitar,  the  heaven-Father.  They  felt 
their  dependence  for  the  things  they  chiefly  sought  after, 
food  and  raiment,  on  the  elements ;  and  without  clearly 
distinguishing  between  creature  and  Creator,  they  looked 
up  to  the  sky,  and  adored  the  Power  that  sent  them 
sunshine  and  showers  in  due  season. 

On   the   other    side   of   God's    universal    Fatherhood, 

Christ's    teaching    rises   far    above    the    level   of    man's 

unassisted  thought.     The  natural  man,  because  he  seeks 

chiefly  material  good,  does  not  much  meditate  on  God's 

1  Matt.  V.  45. 


112  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

paternal  care  for  his  spiritual  wellbeing.  This  aspect 
comes  into  full  view  only  when  men  begin  to  seek  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  His  righteousness  as  the  first  goods 
of  life.  Jesus  taught  that  God  cares  with  paternal 
tenderness  for  the  souls  of  those  who  utterly  neglect 
the  chief  end  and  the  chief  good.  His  teaching  on  this 
subject  is  an  essential  part  of  His  doctrine  of  the  king- 
dom. It  does  not  declare  the  truth  concerning  God's 
relation  to  the  citizens  of  the  kingdom  which  forms  the 
crown  of  His  theology,  but  it  sets  forth  a  truth  the 
belief  of  which  tends  to  make  men  become  citizens. 
The  locus  classicus  for  this  part  of  Christ's  revelation  of 
the  Father  is  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  Luke's  Gospel 
containing  the  parables  concerning  the  finding  of  the 
lost,  and  especially  the  last  of  the  three  parables — the 
Prodigal  Son.  There  God  appears  as  One  who  takes 
pleasure  in  the  repentance  of  sinners  such  as  the  repro- 
bates of  Jewish  society,  because  in  these  penitents  He 
sees  prodigal  children  returning  to  their  Father's  house. 
By  these  parabolic  utterances  Jesus  said  to  all,  however 
far  from  righteousness,  God  loves  you  as  His  children,  no 
more  worthy  to  be  called  sons,  yet  regarded  as  such ;  He 
deplores  your  departure  from  Him,  and  desires  your 
return ;  and  He  will  receive  you  graciously  when,  taught 
wisdom  by  misery,  you  direct  your  footsteps  homewards. 
It  is  not  allegorizing  exegesis  to  take  this  meaning  out 
of  the  parables.  Jesus  was  on  His  defence  for  loving 
classes  of  men  despised  or  despaired  of,  and  His  defence 
in  part  consisted  in  this,  that  His  bearing  towards  the 
outcasts  was  that  of  the  Divine  Being.  He  loved  them 
as  a  Brother ;  God  loved  them  as  a  Father. 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  113 

Even  if  these  parables  had  never  been  spoken,  the 
fatherly  love  of  God  to  the  lost  ones  must  still  have 
appeared  an  obvious  corollary  from  Christ's  own  be- 
haviour towards  them.  The  new  doctrine  of  God  was 
involved  in  the  new  line  of  conduct ;  and  the  three 
parables  concerning  finding  the  lost,  even  if  not  genuine, 
truly  reflect  the  spirit  of  that  conduct  and  its  religious 
significance.^  God  was  proclaimed  to  be  the  com- 
passionate Father  of  the  sinful  by  deeds  more  emphati- 
cally than  by  the  most  pathetic  and  beautiful  words. 
The  much-blamed  sympathetic  intercourse  of  Jesus  with 
the  publicans  and  sinners  of  Israel,  said  to  all  who  could 
understand :  "  The  most  depraved  of  men  is  still  a  man, 
my  brother,  my  Father's  child ;  therefore  I  love  him,  and 
am  fully  assured  that  God  loves  him  as  I  do."  Doubt- 
less converts  to  discipleship  from  these  classes  did 
understand.  They  felb  instinctively  that  the  God  of 
Jesus  was  a  different  Being  from  the  God  of  the  Phari- 
sees, who  scorned  and  repelled  them ;  not  a  God  of 
merely  negative  holiness  keeping  aloof  from  the  sinful, 
but  One  who  desired  to  make  others  partakers  of  His 
holiness ;  not  a  merely  righteous  God,  but  good  as  well 
as  righteous,  the  one  absolutely  Good  Being,  benignant, 
gracious,  delighting  to  bestow  favours ;  not  the  God  of  a 
clique  or  coterie,  the  head  of  the  Pharisaical  party  or  of 

^  "Weizsiicker  (Untersuchungen,  S.  177)  regards  the  parables  in 
Luke  XV.  and  xvi.  as  an  appendix  to  the  first  of  the  group,  that 
of  the  Lost  SheejJ,  which  Luke  has  in  common  with  Matthew 
(xviii.  12,  13).  In  proof  he  points  to  the  fact  tliat  in  chap.  xvii. 
Luke  goes  on  to  Christ's  discourse  on  Offences,  the  connection  in 
which  the  parable  occurs  in  Matthew's  Gospel.  This  is  a  shrewd 
observation. 


114  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  Eabbinical  schools,  but  the  God  of  the  populace  and 
the  profane  rabble,  with  whom  a  penitent  publican  had 
a  better  chance  of  acceptance  than  a  self-complacent 
religionist  who  studied  the  law  day  and  night  and 
scrupulously  observed  all  prescribed  rules.  "  These 
things,"  this  Father-God,  was  revealed  to  the  "  babes," 
though  hidden  from  the  wise  and  understanding ;  hidden 
from  them  because  they  desired  not  such  a  divinity,  but 
rather  one  like  unto  themselves,  priding  himself  on  his 
holiness,  and  jealously  guarding  it  from  tarnish  by 
isolation. 

This  Eather-God  who  loveth  even  the  unholy,  whom 
Jesus  preached  by  word  and  still  more  impressively  by 
^]  action,  is  another  sign  that  the  coming  kingdom  is  not 
'  national  but  universal.  This  God  cannot  be  the  God  of 
the  Jews  only,  any  more  than  He  can  be  the  God  of  a 
Pharisaic  party  within  the  Jewish  nation.  The  Gentiles 
also  are  His  children.  He  may  seem  to  have  neglected 
them  hitherto,  but  the  neglect  can  only  have  been  compara- 
tive. Now  that  Jesus  has  come  revealing  the  Father,  the 
period  of  neglect  manifestly  draws  to  a  close ;  the  time 
of  merciful  visitation  for  the  Gentile  world  is  at  hand. 

Passing  now  from  the  universal  aspect  of  Divine 
Fatherhood  to  the  more  special,  we  find  that  a  paternal 
Providence  for  the  citizens  of  the  kingdom  was  very 
strongly  asserted  by  Jesus.  He  told  His  disciples  that 
they  need  have  no  concern  about  temporal  interests ; 
their  Father  in  heaven  would  take  charge  of  these ; 
their  part  was  to  devote  themselves  in  filial  dutifulness 
and  trust  to  the  service  of  the  kingdom.  "  Be  not 
anxious,"  He  said  to  them,  "  saying.  What  shall  we  eat, 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  115 

or  what  shall  we  drink,  or  wherewithal  shall  we  be 
clothed  ?  For  after  all  these  things  do  the  Gentiles 
seek,  for  your  heavenly  Father  knoweth  that  ye  need 
all  these  things.  But  seek  ye  first  His  kingdom  and 
His  righteousness,  and  all  these  things  shall  be  added 
unto  you."  ^  That  is,  Let  your  care  be  the  kingdom, 
you  yourselves  will  be  your  Father's  care.  It  is  a 
distribution  of  duties  between  a  Father  and  His  children. 
The  children  are  to  devote  themselves  to  the  hingdom 
and  righteousness  of  thcii' Father,  for  so  these  are  named 
in  the  reading  adopted  above,  which  is  intrinsically 
probable  though  found  only  in  the  Vatican  manuscript. 
Devotion  to  the  kingdom  so  conceived  becomes  an  easy 
task.  For  children  love  to  serve  their  Father ;  subjects 
who  are  also  sons  do  the  King's  will  with  enthusiasm. 
On  the  other  hand,  they  are  relieved  from  all  anxiety 
concerning  themselves.  For  the  Divine  Father  and 
King  will  provide  for  His  children.  He  careth  for  all, 
even  for  His  prodigal  children  who  are  unthankful  and 
evil ;  how  much  more  will  He  care  for  dutiful  children 
who  do  His  will,  and  devote  themselves  to  those  interests 
which  He  regards  as  of  supreme  importance ! 

The  same  distribution  of  duties  between  Father  and\ 
children  underlies  the  Lord's  Prayer.     First  come  peti- ', 
tions  for  the  advancement  of  the  kingdom,  implying  that  > 
that  is  the  main  object  of  solicitude  for  the  petitioners ;  / 
then  follow  petitions   for   personal  wants — daily  bread, 
pardon  of  shortcomings,  and  protection  from  evil,  spring- 
ing not  out  of  anxiety,  but  out  of  an  assured  confidence 
that  these  boons  will  be  granted.     The  import  of   the 
1  Matt.  vi.  31-33  ;  Luke  xii.  29-31. 


116  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

prayer  is :  Father  in  heaven,  our  heart's  chief  desire  is 
that  Thy  name  be  glorified,  and  we  give  ourselves  to 
the  service  of  Thy  kingdom,  and  the  doing  of  Thy  will, 
trusting  that  Thou  wilt  remember  all  the  wants  of  us 
Thy  children. 

This  paternal  care  of  God  for  His  servants,  so  patheti- 
cally taught  by  Christ,  is  the  necessary  complement  of 
the  entire  self-consecration  which  is  the  cardinal  virtue 
in  the  ethical  code  of  the  kingdom.  Those  who  are 
required  to  seek  the  kingdom  and  its  righteousness  with 
their  whole  heart  are  men  living  in  the  body,  needing 
food  and  raiment  and  other  things  of  like  nature  for  the 
preservation  of  their  natural  lives ;  and  if  they  are  not 
to  be  preoccupied  with  cares  about  such  matters,  or  to 
permit  such  sordid  solicitudes  to  take  their  thoughts  off 
higher  concerns,  there  must  be  some  one  else  to  look 
after  their  physical  needs.  There  must  be  a  Providence 
over  them  taking  charge  of  temporalities,  even  as  in 
military  organization  there  is  a  commissariat  department 
whose  business  it  is  to  find  the  soldier  in  food  and 
clothing,  while  he  does  not  trouble  himself  about  the 
affairs  of  life  that  he  may  please  him  who  hath  enlisted 
him  for  military  service.'^  Christ  taught  His  disciples 
that  the  commissariat  department  was  in  the  hands  of 
their  heavenly  Father,  so  that  they  had  but  to  play  the 
part  of  soldiers  found  in  everything  they  need.  This 
doctrine,  so  clearly  stated  in  the  passage  above  quoted 
from  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  He  repeated  as  occasion 
required.  When,  for  example.  He  sent  forth  His 
disciples  on  the  Galilean  mission.  He  gave  them  instruc- 
1  2  Tim.  ii.  4. 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  117 

tions  which  might  be  summarized  in  these  two  precepts, 
"  Care  not ; "  "  Fear  not."  ^  Be  careful  about  nothing, 
food,  raiment,  lodging,  not  even  about  a  staff ;  be  not 
anxious  as  to  what  ye  shall  say,  or  how  to  say  it  when 
placed  in  trying  positions :  it  shall  be  given  unto  you 
in  that  hour  what  ye  shall  say.  Fear  not ;  ye  will 
doubtless  sometimes  be  in  circumstances  fitted  to  inspire 
fear,  involving  peril  to  your  lives.  Yet  fear  not  for 
your  bodily  life ;  fear  only  one  thing,  the  death  of  your 
souls  through  unfaithfulness  in  yielding  to  the  tempter 
who  whispers,  "  Save  thyself ;  prefer  personal  safety  to 
duty."  As  for  your  bodies,  why  fear  for  them  ?  Should 
the  worst  come,  you  are  not  really  harmed,  and  your 
Father  will  provide  that  the  worst  come  not  so  long 
as  you  are  needed  for  the  work  of  the  kingdom.  The 
hairs  of  your  head  are  numbered  by  Him  who  careth 
even  for  valueless  sparrows.  To  this  effect  did  Jesus 
exhort  the  apprentice  evangelists.  It  is  unnecessary  to 
ask,  Who  is  the  unnamed  object  of  fear  who  is  distin- 
guished from  the  foes  that  seek  to  stay  the  progress  of 
the  kingdom  by  killing  the  bodies  of  its  apostles,  as  one 
who  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in  Gehenna  ? 
Who  else  can  the  ghostly  foe  be  but  the  evil  spirit  who 
goeth  about  tempting  men  to  prefer  their  personal 
interests  to  the  Divine  ?  But  why  then  is  he  not 
named  ?  That  he  may  be  all  the  more  an  object  of 
dread.  Fear  ye,  said  Jesus  in  effect,  the  nameless  secret 
foe  who  seeks  your  ruin  by  tempting  you  to  play  the 
coward  and  deserter  instead  of  the  man  and  the  hero. 
God  also  might  be  described  as  the  Destroyer,  in  so  far 
1  Matt.  X.  19,  28. 


118  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

as  He  judicially  gives  over  to  perdition  those  who  act 
the  part  of  apostates  and  traitors.  But  so  to  have 
spoken  of  God  would  have  been  bad  policy  and  bad 
rhetoric,  when  the  Speaker  desired  to  lodge  in  the  minds 
of  His  disciples  the  idea  of  God  as  a  Father,  as  the 
antidote  to  all  fear.  To  exhibit  God  as  an  object  of 
infinite  dread  is  a  poor  way  of  preparing  men  to  receive 
Him  as  an  object  of  unbounded  trust.  Moreover,  the 
proper  object  of  fear  is  not  the  judicial  damnation,  but 
that  which  leads  to  it,  temptation  to  apostasy.  The 
point  on  which  we  are  to  bring  to  bear  all  our  faculty 
of  horror  is  that  at  which  the  first  Satanic  suggestion  is 
whispered,  "  Save  thyself :  self-preservation  is  the  first 
duty ;  why  risk  property,  name,  life,  in  a  mad  enterprise  ?  " 
During  the  time  He  was  with  them,  Jesus  found  cause 
for  renewing  the  exhortations,  "  Fear  not,"  "  Care  not," 
to  His  disciples.  In  the  twelfth  chapter  of  Luke  we 
find  such  a  counsel  against  anxiety  lying  like  a  pebble 
on  a  gravel-bank  which  may  have  strayed  from  its 
original  position  in  the  evangelic  history,  but  whose 
intrinsic  value  remains  undiminished.  "  Fear  not,  little 
flock :  for  it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure  to  give  you 
the  kingdom."  ^  The  situation  is  so  described  as  to 
make  clear  how  great  is  the  temptation  to  fear.  The 
disciples  are,  in  relation  to  the  world,  a  small  flock  of 
sheep,  few  in  number,  insignificant  in  influence,  and 
helpless  as  sheep  in  the  midst  of  devouring  wolves. 
Nevertheless,  with  reference  even  to  such  an  apparently 
desperate  situation,  they  are  exhorted  not  to  fear,  but 
to  be  assured  that  their  Father  will  not  suffer  them 
1  Luke  xii.  32. 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  119 

either   to  lose   the   kingdom,  the  chief   object   of    their) 
quest,  or  to  fall  victims  to  hostile  powers. 

These  and  other  words  of  Jesus  setting  forth  God's 
paternal  care  for  those  who  serve  Him,  are  utterances 
full  of  poetry  and  pathos,  the  bare  reading  of  which 
exercises  a  soothing  influence  on  our  troubled  spirits  in 
this  world  of  trial,  sorrow,  and  care.  Yet  we  are  tempted 
to  regard  them  as  a  romantic  idyll  having  the  rights  and 
value  of  poetry,  but  standing  in  no  relation  to  real  life. 
Christ's  whole  doctrine  of  a  Father-God  may  appear  to 
us  the  product  of  a  delicate  religious  imagination  and  a 
child-like  loving  heart  which  went  through  life  dreaming 
a  pleasant  dream,  and  scarce  conscious  of  collisions  with 
hard  unwelcome  experiences.  Some  may  think  the  world 
has  outgrown  the  doctrine.  "  AVe  are  of  age,"  writes 
one,  "  and  do  not  need  a  Father's  care."  ^  Others,  the 
majority,  little  inclined  to  adopt  this  haughty  tone,  find 
the  doctrine  very  w^elcome,  if  only  it  were  true.  It  is  a 
spring  in  the  desert  of  life,  nevertheless  is  not  life  a 
desert  all  the  same  ?  It  may  be ;  but  whatever  the  facts 
are  which  seem  to  justify  this  pessimistic  view,  they  were 
perfectly  familiar  to  Jesus.  His  doctrine  of  Divine 
Fatherhood  did  come  from  the  heart ;  it  was  as  far  as 
possible  from  being  the  dry  scientific  utterance  of  a 
scholastic  theologian,  and  scholastic  theology  has  shown 
its  consciousness  of  the  fact  by  treating  the  doctrine  with 
nesflect.  But  Jesus  uttered  the  doctrine  with  full  know- 
ledge  of  all  in  experience  that  seemed  to  contradict  it, 
and  earnestly  believed  it,  all  that  notwithstanding.  He 
knew  how  much  there  is  to  tempt  men  to  say :  Provi- 
1  Heine,  Sammillche  Werke,  v.  140. 


120  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

dence  is  anything  but  paternal,  if  indeed  there  be  a 
Providence  at  all ;  for  has  not  every  man  to  be  his  own 
providence,  finding  for  himself  food  and  raiment  and  all 
things  needful  as  best  he  can,  and  endeavouring  the 
while  not  altogether  to  forget  higher  matters  ?  And  He 
spoke  words  fitted  to  lay  such  doubting  thoughts  arising 
out  of  sombre  experience.  How  vividly  He  conceived 
the  mental  state  of  the  careworn,  appears  from  Luke's 
version  of  the  counsel  against  anxiety,  which  might  be 
thus  paraphrased :  "  Seek  not  what  ye  shall  eat  or  what 
ye  shall  drink,  neither  he  ye  as  a  shij^  raised  aloft  on  the 
billows  of  a  trouhled,  tempestuous  sea"  ^  But  it  was  not 
alone  by  a  stray  word  such  as  this,  preserved  by  the 
third  evangelist,^  that  Jesus  showed  His  intimate 
acquaintance  and  deep  sympathy  with  the  trials  of  faith 
to  which  the  servants  of  the  kingdom  are  liable.  From 
the  lessons  He  taught  His  disciples  on  Fersexeixcnce  in 
Prayer,  it  appears  how  well  aw^are  He  w^as  that  God 
often  shows  Himself  so  little  like  a  Father,  that  those 
who  trust  in  Him  are  tempted  to  think  Him  rather  like 
a  man  of  selfish  spirit  who  cares  only  for  his  ow^n  com- 
fort, or  like  an  unjust  judge  who  is  indifferent  to  right. 
Such  precisely  are  the  representations  of  God  as  Be 
appears  in  the  two  parables  of  the  Selfish  Neighhoitr 
and  the  Unjust  Judge?  The  relevancy  of  the  parables 
requires    that    these    characters   should   be   regarded   as 

^  Luke  xii.  29,  y,oe,\  ^'/^  (/.iTiapll^iaQs. 

2  It  is  impossible  to  decide  whether  we  have  here  an  explanatory- 
gloss  on  the  counsel  against  anxiety,  or  an  utterance  of  Jesus  in  its 
original  form.  The  striking  character  of  the  expression  is  in  favour 
of  the  latter  view. 

^  Luke  xi.  5-8,  xviii.  1-8. 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  121 

representing  God,  not  as  He  is  indeed,  but  as  He  seems 
to  tried  faith.  It  is  thus  tacitly  admitted  by  Jesus,  that 
far  from  giving  His  children  what  they  need  before  they 
ask  or  when  they  ask,  God  often  delays  for  a  lengthened 
period  answers  to  prayer,  so  as  to  present  to  suppliants 
an  aspect  of  indifference,  heartlessness,  unrighteousness. 
The  didactic  drift  of  the  two  parables  is :  You  will  have 
to  wait  on  God,  to  wait  possibly  till  hope  deferred  make 
the  heart  sick,  but  it  is  w^orth  your  while  to  wait,  "  for 
the  Lord  is  good  to  them  that  wait  on  Him,  to  the  soul 
that  seeketh  Him."  Man  can  be  compelled  to  hear  by 
importunity  and  incessant  knocking.  God  is  not  a  man 
to  be  compelled,  yet  it  may  be  said  that  the  apparent 
reluctance  of  Providence  can  be  overcome  by  persistent 
prayer  which  refuses  to  be  gainsaid  or  frustrated,  con- 
tinuing to  knock  at  the  door  with  an  importunity  that 
knows  no  shame,^  and  assailing  the  ear  of  the  judge  with 
outcries  in  a  temper  that  will  not  be  trifled  with,  and  an 
attitude  almost  threatening.^  In  other  words,  with  full 
consciousness  how  much  there  is  in  the  world  which 
seems  to  prove  the  contrary,  Jesus  asserted  the  reality  of 
a  Paternal  Providence  continually  working  for  the  good 
of  those  who  make  the  kingdom  of  God  their  chief  end. 
And  this  faith  is  the  distinctively  Christian  theory  of 
the  Universe.  Christians  believe  that  the  kim^dom  of 
heaven  is  a  chief  end  for  God  as  well  as  for  themselves, 
and  that  He  makes  all  things  subservient  to  its  interests. 

1  duxihiee,  sliamelessness,  is  ascribed  to  the  petitioner  in  the  earlier 
parable. 

2  The  unjust  judge  affects  to  he  afraid  lest  the  widow  at  last  should 
strike  him  :  hx  ^^  vTrwTriocl^n  ^s. 


122  THK  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

This  faith  gives  them  victory  over  all  sordid  solicitudes, 
and  enables  them  with  cheerfulness  and  hope  to  leave  all 
their  personal  concerns  in  the  hands  of  their  Father. 

While  assuring  His  disciples  of  God's  care  for  their 
temporal  wants,  Jesus  did  not  neglect  to  teach  them  the 
still  more  important  truth  that  their  spiritual  wellbeing 
was  an  object  of  tender  solicitude  to  their  heavenly 
Father.  This  indeed  hardly  needed  to  be  taught  expressly. 
The  higher  care  is  implied  in  the  lower.  God  cares  for 
the  bodies  of  His  children,  that  they  may  give  themselves 
without  distraction  to  that  service  of  the  kingjdom  which 
is  the  very  life  and  health  of  the  soul.  Nevertheless, 
Jesus  deemed  it  expedient  to  make  the  higher  aspect  of 
God's  paternal  providence  the  subject  of  special  declara- 
tions. One  such  may  be  found  even  in  the  promise  that 
food  and  raiment  would  be  provided,  which  is  so  expressed 
as  to  include  a  reference  to  the  higher  goods  of  life. 
"  All  these  things  shall  be  added  unto  you."  If  food 
and  raiment  be  an  addition,  there  must  be  a  portion 
to  which  they  are  added.  That  portion  consists  of 
the  kingdom  and  its  righteousness,  chiefly  sought,  and 
surely  to  be  found.  What  Jesus  thus  taught  indirectly 
though  most  forcibly,  He  directly  declared  when  He  said : 
"  Fear  not,  little  flock,  it  is  your  Father's  good  pleasure 
to  give  you  the  kingdom."  He  gave  a  similar  assurance 
by  introducing  into  the  model  prayer  petitions  for  the 
pardon  of  sin,  and  for  protection  from  temptation  and 
from  the  power  of  moral  evil.^    The  two  parables  already 

^  It  seems  best  to  take  tov  Trovnpov  as  referrin*:^,  not  to  tlie  Evil  One, 
l)iit  to  evil  in  the  abstract.  Tlie  petition  thereby  gains  the  widest 
comprehensiveness. 


CHRIST'S  DOCTEINE  OF  GOD.  123 

referred  to  bear,  if  not  exclusively,  at  least  inclusively, 
on  spiritual  interests.  The  later  parable  relates  to  the 
public  interest  of  the  Divine  kingdom.  The  earlier  must 
be  supposed  to  embrace  within  its  scope  all  the  petitions 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer  to  which  it  is  appended,  the  peti- 
tions relating  to  pardon  and  protection  from  evil,  not  less 
than  that  relating  to  daily  bread.  From  the  sentence 
with  which  the  lesson  on  prayer,  recorded  in  the  eleventh 
chapter  of  Luke,  ends,  we  should  naturally  infer  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  as  a  sanctifying  power  is  supposed  to  be  the 
chief  object  of  desire.  Criticism  may  indeed  find  in  the 
remarkable  expression  a  tinge  of  Paulinism.  But  grant- 
ing that  we  have  here  a  Pauline  modification  of  Christ's 
words,  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit  put  into  the  mouth 
of  Christ  by  Luke  is  nothing  more  than  an  assurance 
that  the  prayer  for  protection  from  temptation  ^  shall  be 
answered.  The  temptations  chiefly  to  be  dreaded  are 
those  which  solicit  us  to  sacrifice  primary  interests  for 
secondary,  righteousness  for  physical  wants ;  and  we  are 
kept  from  yielding  to  such  by  the  Divine  Spirit  dwelling 
in  us,  and  imparting  to  us  a  single  eye,  a  pure  heart,  a 
generous,  noble  devotion  to  the  kinsjdom  and  its  interests. 
It  is  important  to  observe,  that  while  giving  these 
various  assurances  to  His  disciples  that  God  would  attend 
to  their  spiritual  welfare,  Jesus  did  not  lead  them  to 
expect  that  in  this  sphere  there  would  be  no  occasion  for 
exercising  the  virtue  of  patience.      On  the  contrary,  it  is 

1  In  the  best  texts  of  Luke's  version  of  the  Lord's  Prayer,  the 
clause  dXhoi  pvaui  ijuoi;  cI'tto  rov  Troi/noov  is  wanting.  It  quaUfies  the 
previous  clause  hy  explaining  in  what  sense  temptation  is  to  be 
deprecated,  and  is  therefore  implied  even  when  not  expressed. 


124  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

clearly  implied  in  the  parable  of  the  selfish  neighbour, 
that  the  delays  which  make  God  assume  so  untoward  an 
aspect  take  place  in  connection  with  all  the  objects 
referred  to  in  the  Lord's  Prayer :  the  advancement  of 
the  kingdom,  daily  bread,  the  personal  spiritual  necessi- 
ties of  disciples.  Hence  we  learn  that  even  the  Holy 
Spirit  may  not  be  given  at  once  in  satisfying  measure  to 
those  who  earnestly  desire  it,  though  sure  to  be  so  given 
eventually.  The  heavenly  Father  may  for  a  season 
appear  unwilling  to  grant  to  those  who  seek  first  the 
kingdom,  even  that  which  they  most  value — righteous- 
ness, sanctity,  complete  victory  over  evil.  This  is  a 
familiar  fact  of  Christian  experience,  and  the  fact  im- 
ports that  personal  sanctification  is  a  gradual  process. 
The  Holy  Spirit  is  given  in  ample  measure  to  all  earnest 
souls,  but  not  even  to  the  most  earnest  without  such 
delays  as  are  most  trying  to  faith  and  patience.  This 
fact,  plainly  implied  in  the  lessons  on  prayer  recorded 
by  Luke,  is  directly  recognised  in  the  parable  of  the 
Blade,  the  Ear,  and  the  Full  Corn}  preserved  by  Mark 
alone.  The  parable  may  be  held  to  refer  in  the  first 
place  to  the  Divine  kingdom  viewed  collectively,  and  in 
that  view  it  has  an  important  bearing  on  the  question 
whether  Jesus  expected  the  kingdom  to  pass  through  a 
lengthened  period  of  development.  But  nothing  forbids  us 
to  regard  the  parable  as  applicable  likewise  to  individual 
experience.  The  kingdom  comes  in  the  individual  as 
well  as  in  the  community  ;  and  the  lesson  we  learn  from 
the  parable,  is  that  the  kingdom  comes  as  ripe  grain 
comes — gradually  passing  through  stages  analogous  to 
1  Mark  iv.  26-29. 


CHRIST'S  DOCTEINE  OF  GOD.  125 

those  in  the  growth  of  corn :  stages  that  cannot  be  over- 
leapt,  that  no  amount  of  earnestness  will  avail  to  super- 
sede ;  that  are  indeed  most  marked  in  those  who  are 
most  earnest,  and  who  ultimately  exhibit  the  Divine  life 
in  its  highest  measure  of  energy  and  beauty.  This  is  a 
great  truth  still  not  well  understood,  which  it  much 
concerns  earnest  seekers  after  God  to  lay  to  heart/  Some 
insight  into  it  is  needful  to  enable  Christians  at  the 
critical  period  of  their  spiritual  life,  that  of  the  green 
ear,  to  believe  in  the  Fatherhood  of  God  in  its  highest 
aspect.  Failing  to  grasp  the  law  of  gradual  sanctifica- 
tion,  they  will  be  tempted  to  think  that  God  does  in  the 
highest  sphere  what  Jesus  declared  no  earthly  father 
would  do  in  the  lower  sphere  of  physical  life,  viz.  mock 
His  children  by  giving  them  stones  when  they  ask  for 
bread,  and  so  prove  to  be  in  truth  no  Father  at  all. 
And  if  we  doubt  the  reality  of  God's  Fatherhood  in  the 
realm  of  grace,  what  will  it  avail  us  to  believe  in  His 
Fatherhood  in  ordinary  providence  ?  If  we  doubt  His 
willingness  to  give  us  the  bread  of  eternal  life,  what 
comfort  can  it  afford  us,  who  desire  that  bread  above  all 
thinsjs,  to  believe  that  He  is  willing^  to  G;ive  the  bread 

^  The  parable  above  referred  to  contains  the  clearest  statement  of 
the  truth  that  the  law  of  growth  obtains  in  the  kingdom  of  God  to 
be  found  in  the  New  Testament.  It  is  very  doubtful  whether  this 
truth,  in  relation  either  to  the  individual  or  to  the  community,  was 
grasped  by  the  apostles  (not  excepting  Paul),  not  to  speak  of  the 
Apostolic  Church  in  general.  This  consideration  is  the  best  guarantee 
for  the  genuineness  of  this  logion  recorded  by  Mark  alone.  Its 
absence  from  the  other  Gospels  may  be  due  to  the  fact  that  it  teaches 
a  truth  in  advance  of  the  ideas  both  of  the  evangelists  and  of  those 
for  whose  benefit  they  wrote.  Pfleiderer  {r)as  Urchrisienthum, 
S.  370)  recognises  the  originality  of  the  parable. 


126  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

that  perislieth  ?  Nay,  if  we  let  go  the  one  faith,  how 
can  w^e  retain  the  other  ?  If  we  deny  the  Fatherhood 
of  God  in  grace,  how  shall  we  believe  in  a  paternal 
Providence  ?  Along  with  faith  in  God  as  the  Father 
of  our  spirits,  will  not  faith  in  Him  as  the  Provider  for 
our  bodies  fade  out  of  our  hearts,  and  leave  us  with  no 
better  creed  than  that  of  a  godless  world — every  man 
for  himself  ? 

That  the  kingdom  of  God  comes  as  a  spiritual  posses- 
sion, only  gradually,  even  when  earnestly  sought  as  the 
highest  good,  the  history  of  Christ's  disciples  suffices  to 
prove.  The  devotion  of  these  men  to  the  kingdom  was 
intense  from  the  beginning,  but  it  was  ignorant  and 
impure.  Even  at  a  late  period  they  were  so  unacquainted 
with  the  nature  of  the  kingdom  that  they  could  quarrel 
about  places  of  distinction  in  it,  and  their  motives  were 
so  corrupt  that  their  Master  found  it  necessary  to  sj)eak 
of  conversion  as  a  condition  of  their  obtaining  the 
humblest  place  in  the  Divine  commonwealth.  The 
initial  ideas  of  the  Twelve  were  conventional.  They 
accepted  current  ideas  of  the  kingdom,  and  of  righteous- 
ness, and  of  God ;  and  poured  the  new  wine  of  their 
enthusiasm  into  old  bottles.  This  is  ever  the  way  with 
religious  novices.  There  is  plenty  of  zeal,  but  little 
spiritual  discernment.  Conventional  orthodoxy  is  im- 
plicitly adopted  as  the  truth,  all  conventionally  holy 
causes  are  fervently  espoused,  and  all  current  religious 
customs  are  scrupulously  observed.  The  Twelve  were 
sincere  seekers  of  the  kingdom ;  but  they  had  to  seek 
it  not  merely  in  the  sense  of  serving  its  interests,  but  in 
the  sense  of  striving  to  find  out  its  true  nature,  and  the 


Christ's  doctrine  of  god.  127 

nature  of  its  laws,  and  of  its  Divine  Euler.  They  were 
Jews  to  begin  with,  and  the  task  before  them  was  to 
become  Christians  in  their  thoughts  of  God,  and  of  all 
things  Divine.  It  w^as  for  this  end  that  "  Jesus  ordained 
twelve,  that  they  should  be  with  Him."  ^  He  invited 
them  to  take  His  yoke  upon  them,  that  He  might  teach 
them  the  mysteries  of  the  kingdom,  and  reveal  unto 
them  the  Father.  The  former  function  He  performed 
by  uttering  deep  truths,  many  of  which  are  recorded  in 
the  Gospels ;  the  latter  not  so  much  by  w^ord  as  by  life. 
He  showed  the  Father  by  unfolding  Himself.  To  see 
Him  was  to  see  the  Father,  to  understand  His  spirit 
was  to  know  the  Father's  inmost  heart.  According  to 
the  testimony  of  the  fourth  Gospel,  the  companions  of 
Jesus  were  slow  learners  in  this  department  of  their 
spiritual  education.  "  Show  us  the  Father,  and  it 
sufficeth  us,"^  Philip  is  made  to  say  on  the  eve  of 
the  Passion.  It  seems  a  libel  on  a  fellow-disciple. 
Yet,  after  all,  the  alleged  ignorance  is  perfectly  credible. 
Has  not  Christendom  been  slow  to  learn  the  revelation 
of  the  Father  ?  Have  we  not  yet  to  learn  it,  by  accept- 
ing the  Jesus  of  the  Gospels  as  an  absolutely  true  and 
full  manifestation  of  the  Divine  Being,  and  believing 
without  reserve  that  He  and  God  are  in  spirit  one  ?  A 
thoroughly  Christian  idea  of  God  is  still  a  desideratum, 
and  when  the  Church  lias  reached  it,  the  kingdom  of 
God  shall  have  come  in  power. 

1  Mark  iii.  14.  2  Jq]^^^  xiv.  8. 


CHAPTEE  V. 


CHRIST  S  DOCTRINE  OF  MAN. 


Every  doctrine  of  God  has  its  congruous  doctrine  of 
man.  A  consistent  pantheism,  for  example,  regards  man 
as  insignificant,  not  distinguishable  from  nature,  not 
generically  different  from  the  beasts.  The  Christian 
idea  of  God,  on  the  contrary,  is  naturally  associated  with 
high  views  as  to  the  dignity  and  worth  of  human  nature 
in  its  ideal,  if  not  in  its  actual  condition.  For  as  God 
cannot  be  the  God  of  the  dead  but  of  the  living,  so 
neither  can  He  be  the  Father  of  beings  not  intrinsically 
superior  to  the  brutes.  His  children  must  be  made  in 
His  own  image,  and  possess  the  inalienable  dignity  of 
personality  constituted  by  the  possession  of  reason  and 
freedom.  Accordingly  Jesus  taught  a  high  doctrine  con- 
cerning the  dignity  of  man.  He  said  with  unexampled 
emphasis :  A  man  is  a  man,  not  a  mere  human  animal ; 
he  is  a  being  of  infinite  importance  to  God,  and  ought  to 
be  such  also  to  himself  and  to  his  fellows.  He  quaintly 
hinted  the  deep  truth  by  asking  such  thought-provoking 
questions  as  these :  Is  not  the  life  more  than  meat  ?  ^ 
How  much  is  a  man  better  than  a  sheep  ?  ^  What  shall 
a  man  give  in  exchange  for  his  soul  ?  ^ 

1  Matt.  vi.  25.  2  ^att.  xii.  12.  ^  Matt.  xvi.  26. 


128 


cheist's  doctrine  of  man.  129 

Jesus  taught  His  uew  doctrine  of  man  more  empha- 
tically by  His  public  action  than  by  these  or  any  other 
kindred  words.  In  His  invitations  to  enter  the  kingdom. 
He  addressed  Himself  very  specially,  as  I  have  already 
had  occasion  to  remark,  to  the  poor,  to  those  who  were 
in  bad  social  repute,  to  the  labouring  and  heavy-laden, 
the  children  of  sorrow  and  care.  This  did  not  mean 
that  He  was  animated  by  class  partialities,  and  desired 
to  set  one  part  of  society  against  another ;  the  destitute 
against  the  wealthy,  the  profligates  against  well-conducted 
citizens.  As  little  did  the  new  interest  in  people  of 
humble  rank  signify  that  Jesus  regarded  poverty  as  a 
virtue,  of  itself  a  passport  into  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 
Some  indeed  have  thought  otherwise.  "  Pure  Ebionism," 
says  Eenan,  "  that  is,  the  doctrine  that  the  poor  alone 
shall  be  saved,  that  the  kingdom  of  the  poor  is  about  to 
come,  was  the  doctrine  of  Jesus.  .  .  .  Poverty  remained 
an  ideal  from  which  the  true  lineage  of  Jesus  never 
broke  away.  To  possess  nothing  was  the  true  evangelic 
state ;  mendicity  became  a  virtue,  a  holy  state."  ^  This 
may  be  a  slightly  plausible,  but  it  is  certainly  a  mistaken 
judgment.  With  equal  plausibility  might  it  be  main- 
tained that,  according  to  Christ's  teaching,  publicans  and 
harlots  were  as  such  fit  subjects  of  the  divine  kingdom. 
The  truth  is  that  poverty  and  sorrow  were  not,  any  more 
than  bad  character,  positive  qualifications  for  citizenship, 
but  merely  conditions  that  were  likely  to  act  as  predis- 
posing causes,  preparing  men  to  listen  with  interest  to 
the  announcement  that  the  kingdom  was  at  hand. 

The  prominence  given  to  the  poor  in  the  Gospel  of  the 
1  Vie  de  Jesus,  pp.  179,  183. 


130  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

kingdom,  in  so  far  as  it  had  theoretic  significance,  and 
was  not  the  spontaneous  expression  of  compassion, 
marked  the  value  set  by  Jesus  on  man  as  man.  The 
poor  represent  man  stripped  of  all  extrinsic  attributes 
of  honour,  and  reduced  to  that  which  is  common  to  all 
mankind.  On  this  naked  humanity  the  world  has  ever 
set  little  value.  It  begins  to  interest  itself  in  a  man 
when  he  is  clothed  with  some  outward  distinction  of 
wealth  or  birth  or  station.  A  mere  man  is  a  social 
nobody.  Christ,  on  the  other  hand,  highly  valued  in 
man  only  his  humanity,  accounting  nothing  he  could 
possess  of  such  importance  as  what  he  himself  was  or 
might  become.  "What  is  a  man  profited,"  He  asked, 
"  if  he  shall  gain  the  whole  world,  and  lose  his  own 
life  ? "  ^  The  life  declared  to  be  so  precious  is  that  in 
man  which  makes  him  a  man — the  life  of  a  spirit  con- 
versant with  things  divine  and  eternal.  For  the  pre- 
servation and  health  of  this  higher  life,  Jesus  taught,  the 
lower  animal  life  and  all  possessions  should,  if  need  were, 
be  sacrificed. 

By  the  interest  He  took  in  the  depraved,  Jesus  still 
further  accentuated  His  doctrine  as  to  the  value  of 
human  nature.  "  Honest  poverty "  has  a  certain  worth 
appreciable  even  by  those  who  set  their  hearts  on  pos- 
sessions. But  what  shall  be  said  of  humanity  stripped 
not  only  of  outward  goods  but  even  of  character  ?  That 
it  is  still  humanity,  replied  the  "  friend  of  publicans  and 
sinners,"  with  latent  spiritual  powers  capable  of  develop- 
ment, with  the  solemn  responsibilities  of  moral  agents, 
with  features  of  tlie  divine  image  not  yet  wholly  effaced 
1  Matt.  xvi.  26. 


CHRIST'S  DOCTEINE  OF  MAN.  131 

and  that  may  be  restored.  He  did  not  deny  the  degrada- 
tion, or  utter  sentimental  apologies  for  the  sin ;  but  He 
did  deny  the  irrecoverableness.  He  hoped  for  those 
of  whom  the  world  despaired,  the  world  of  culture  as 
represented  by  philosophers  like  Aristotle  and  Celsus ; 
the  world  of  sanctity  as  represented  by  contemporary 
Pharisees.  And  because  He  hoped,  He  laboured,  seeking 
as  a  physican  to  heal  sick  souls,  as  a  shepherd  to  recover 
straying  sheep. 

Out  of  this  high  doctrine  of  the  dignity  of  human 
nature  springs  the  doctrine  of  immortality.  That  doctrine 
needed  no  separate  announcement.  Man  in  Christ's 
teaching  is  so  great  a  being  that  he  inevitably  projects 
himself  into  eternity.  The  present  world  cannot  hold 
him.  The  anthropology  of  Jesus  also  contains  the  germs 
of  all  manner  of  social  improvements  in  the  earthly  life 
of  man.  It  has  been  alleged,  indeed,  that  by  its  other- 
world  liness  Christ's  teaching  breeds  indifference  to  tem- 
poral interests.  "The  aim  of  Christianity,"  remarks 
Eenan,  ''was  in  no  respect  the  perfecting  of  human 
society,  or  the  increase  of  the  sum  of  individual  happi- 
ness. Men  try  to  make  themselves  as  comfortable  as 
possible  when  they  take  in  earnest  the  earth  and  the 
days  they  are  to  spend  on  it.  But  when  one  is  told 
that  the  earth  is  about  to  pass  away,  that  this  life  is  but 
a  brief  probation,  the  insignificant  prelude  of  an  eternal 
ideal,  to  what  good  embellish  it  ?  One  does  not  think 
of  decorating  the  hovel  in  which  he  is  to  remain  only 
for  a  moment."  ^  But  connect  the  doctrine  of  the  life  to 
come  with  its  proper  root,  man's  dignity  as  possessor  of 
1  Marc  Aurele,  p.  605. 


132  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

personality  and  filially  related  to  God,  and  there  is  no 
risk  of  the  present  life  being  overlooked.  Man's  dignity 
holds  true  in  reference  to  both  worlds,  and  must  be 
respected  in  all  relations.  Each  man  must  treat  himself 
now  as  becomes  a  man,  and  must  be  so  treated  by  his 
fellow-man.  NoUesse  oUige.  The  "  children  of  the  resur- 
rection "  must  conduct  themselves  as  becomes  the  heirs 
of  a  great  destiny.  It  is  therefore  to  be  expected  that, 
except  when  under  the  influence  of  morbid  moods  such 
as  manifest  themselves  occasionally  in  all  religions, 
believers  in  a  future  life  will  be  as  mindful  of  present 
human  interests,  physical  and  social,  as  the  adherents  of 
the  modern  religion  of  humanity,  in  which  the  divine 
Father  and  the  heavenly  home  are  discarded,  and  only 
earth  and  man  retained.  It  does  seem  indeed  as  if  a 
creed  which  says,  "  This  life  is  all,  therefore  make  the 
most  of  it,"  oucjht  to  make  the  most  of  it.  But  there  is 
no  small  risk  under  this  new  creed  of  men  growing 
weary  in  well-doing,  through  deadly  doubt  as  to  the 
worth  of  human  life.  While  one  generation  says,  "  This 
life  is  all,  let  us  make  the  most  of  it  for  ourselves  and 
others,"  the  next  may  go  on  to  say,  "  This  life  is  all, 
therefore  it  does  not  much  matter  how  it  is  spent. 
Misery,  vice,  injustice — society  is  full  of  them ;  but  no 
matter,  it  will  all  soon  end  for  any  individual  victim." 

The  tendency  of  Christ's  doctrine  of  man  to  make  for 
social  improvement  is  apt  to  be  overlooked  because  of 
the  indirectness  of  its  method  of  working.  The  method 
of  Christianity  is  to  work  by  idealism,  not  by  agitation ; 
as  a  regenerative  influence,  not  as  a  movement  of  reform. 
It  does  not  say  slavery   is  wrong,  and   follow   up  the 


CHPJSTS  DOCTEINE  OF  MAN.  133 

assertion  by  an  agitation  for  abolition  and  by  stirring  up 
servile  insurrection.  It  says :  "  A  slave  is  a  man,  and 
may  be  a  noble  man,"  and  leaves  the  idea  to  work  as  a 
leaven  slowly  but  surely  towards  emancipation  and  free- 
dom. To  ardent  reformers  the  method  may  appear  slow, 
and  those  who  use  it  chargeable  with  apathy.  On  this 
very  account  the  Baptist  doubted  the  Messiahship  of 
Jesus.  Jesus  was  in  no  hurry  to  renovate  the  world. 
He  let  it  go  on  in  its  bad  way,  and  meantime  did  all  the 
good  He  could.  To  the  fiery  reformer,  the  slow,  indirect 
method  of  the  Eegenerator  seemed  most  unsatisfactory. 
Nevertheless  the  slow  method  turned  out  in  the  long-run 
to  be  the  surest. 

To  value  human  nature  in  its  ideal  is  one  thing,  to 
take  flattering  views  of  its  real  state  as  seen  in  the 
average  man  is  another.  Jesus  did  the  former ;  He  did 
not  do  the  latter.  The  interest  He  took  in  the  poor, 
the  suffering,  the  depraved,  was  not  sentimental.  These 
classes  were  not  pets  of  whose  condition  He  took  an 
indulgent,  partial  view,  deeming  the  poor  the  victims  of 
wrong,  and  the  sinful  good-hearted,  though  weak-willed 
people.  He  was  under  no  illusion  as  to  the  average 
moral  condition  of  mankind.  He  saw  clearly  that  few 
realized  their  moral  responsibilities,  and  conducted  them- 
selves as  became  sons  of  the  Father  in  heaven ;  and  He 
spake  as  one  well  aware  of  the  fact.  He  compared  men 
as  He  found  them  to  wandering  sheep,  lost  coins,  prodigal 
sons :  ^  expressions  certainly  implying  grave  departure 
from  the  requirements  of  the  moral  ideal.  It  is  therefore 
a  serious  mistake  to  suppose  that  Christ's  view  of  human 
1  Luke  XV. 


134  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

nature  in  its  actual  condition  was,  to  use  a  theological 
term,  Pelagian.  Baur  puts  a  strained  meaning  on  certain 
of  His  words,  when  he  says  that,  according  to  the  teaching 
of  the  parable  of  the  sower,  it  lies  with  man  himself  to 
come  into  the  kingdom  of  God,  in  his  own  will,  his  own 
natural  capacity  and  receptivity.^  A  similar  false 
impression,  formed  from  stray  utterances,  seems  to  have 
dictated  the  remark  made  by  Mr.  Mill  in  his  Essays  07i 
Religion  :  "  According  to  the  creed  of  most  denominations 
of  Christians  (though  assuredly  not  of  Christ),  man  is  by 
nature  wicked."  ^  Christ's  authority  might  be  cited  for 
much  that  is  said  in  the  creeds  on  the  subject  of  human 
depravity.  He  saw  in  human  lives  all  around  Him  the 
evidence  of  sin's  corrupting,  deadening,  enslaving  power. 

Yet  it  must  be  admitted,  on  the  other  hand,  that 
Christ's  way  of  speaking  concerning  human  depravity 
was  in  important  respects  unlike  that  of  scholastic 
theology.  The  way  of  this  theology  is  to  take  all  Bible 
terms  as  used  with  scientific  strictness,  and  thereon  to 
build  the  edifice  of  dogma ;  forgetful  that  the  Bible  to  a 
large  extent  is  literature,  not  dogma,  and  that  its  words 
are  fluid  and  poetic,  not  fixed  and  prosaic.  Thus  the 
natural  man  is  held  to  be  "  dead "  as  a  stone  is  dead. 
Christ's  view  was  more  sympathetic,  hopeful,  and  kindly. 
He  saw  in  the  sinful  something  more  than  death, 
depravity,  and  bondage — some  spark  of  vitality,  some 
latent  affinity  for  good,  an  imprisoned  spirit  longing  to 
be  free,  a  true  self  victimized  by  Satanic  agency,  that 
would  fain  escape  from  thrall.      On  this  better  element 

^  Geschichte  der  Christlichen  Kirche,  i.  34. 
2  Three  Essays  on  Religion,  p.  10. 


CHRIST'S  DOCTRINE  OF  MAN.  135 

He  ever  kept  his-  eye ;  His  constant  effort  was  to  get 
into  contact  with  it,  and  He  refused  to  despair  of  success. 
Most  significant  in  this  connection  are  the  words  in 
which  He  compared  the  multitude,  whose  spiritual 
destitution  moved  His  compassion,  to  an  abundant 
harvest  waiting  to  be  reaped.^  The  comparison  implies 
not  only  urgency,  but  susceptibility.  The  grain  is  ready 
to  be  reaped.  The  people  are  ready  to  receive  any  one 
who  comes  to  them  in  God's  name  with  a  veritable  gospel 
on  his  lips,  and  an  honest  human  love  in  his  heart ;  the 
evidence  being  the  way  they  crowded  around  Jesus 
Himself.  A  recent  writer  on  the  life  of  Jesus  remarks 
that  the  words  are  parabolic,  and  that  the  term  harvest 
was  not  applicable  to  the  spiritual  sphere ;  in  that  region 
it  was  seed-sowing,  not  harvest-work,  that  was  in  request.^ 
This  is  simply  a  superficial  explaining  away  of  the  words. 
The  very  point  of  interest  in  the  saying  is  that  Jesus 
does  mean  to  say  there  is  an  abundant  harvest  w^aiting 
to  be  reaped  among  the  masses.  Doubtless  it  was  a 
harvest  not  visible  to  the  professional  religious  guides 
of  Israel,  any  more  than  to  modern  commentators. 
What  was  apparent  to  them  was  merely  the  ignorance, 
the  vice,  the  sordid  misery  of  the  million ;  not  a  harvest, 
but  a  heap  of  rotting  weeds  exciting  aversion.  The 
harvest  existed  only  for  the  eye  of  a  faith  whose  vision 
was  sharpened  by  love.  Therein  precisely  lay  the 
difference  between  Jesus  and  the  Eabbis.  Where  they 
saw  only  useless  noxious  rubbish.  He,  with  His  loving, 
hopeful  spirit,  saw  useful  grain;  not  mere  sin,  but 
possibilities  of  good;  not  utter  hopeless  depravity,  but 
1  Matt.  ix.  37.  ^  Weiss,  Lehen  Jesu,  ii.  119. 


136  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

indefinite  capabilities  of  sanctity.  There  an  extensive 
harvest  for  the  kingdom  might  be  reaped,  in  conversions 
of  profligates  into  devotees,  of  moral  outcasts  into  exem- 
plary citizens,  of  ignorant  men  into  attached  disciples. 
No  wonder  the  religious  guides  of  Israel  misunderstood 
the  sinner's  Friend !  How  could  they  fail  to  misunder- 
stand the  conduct  of  a  man  whose  thoughts  of  the  people 
they  heartlessly  abandoned  to  the  fate  of  an  untended 
flock  were  so  generous  and  hopeful  ?  It  was  so  much 
easier  to  call  Him  a  bad  man  than  to  comprehend  a  love 
in  which  they  had  no  share  ! 

Sympathy  and  hope  were  expressed  in  the  very  terms 
which  Jesus  employed  to  describe  the  moral  degeneracy 
of  those  whose  good  He  sought.  The  remark  specially 
applies  to  the  term  "  lost  "  so  often  used  by  Him  with 
that  view.  It  is  a  word  expressive  of  compassion  rather 
than  of  judicial  severity.  It  points  to  a  condition  falling 
far  short  of  final  irretrievable  perdition.  To  express  that 
state  the  middle  voice  of  the  verb  aTroWv/jit  is  sometimes 
used ;  ^  but  the  neuter  participle  to  a7ro\co\6(;,  applied 
by  Jesus  to  the  objects  of  His  loving  care,  denotes  rather 
a  condition  of  peril  like  that  of  a  straying  sheep,  or  of 
waste  like  that  of  a  lost  coin,  or  of  thoughtlessness 
ending  in  misery  like  that  of  a  wayward  youth.  The 
lost  ones  have  wandered  unwittingly  from  the  fold ; 
they  are  living  in  forgetfulness  of  the  chief  end  of  man ; 
they  are  children  of  passion,  obeying  fitful  impulse,  and 
impatient  of  moral  restraints.  But  they  are  lost  sheep 
that  may  be  brought  back  to  the  fold ;  they  are  lost  coins 
possessing  value  if  only  they  could  be  found ;  they  are 
1  Vid.  John  iii.  16. 


cheist's  doctrine  of  man.  137 

lost  sons  of  God,  with  filial  memories  and  filial  feelings 
buried  in  their  hearts  which  will  rise  to  the  surface  when 
want  and  woe  have  brought  them  to  their  senses. 

In  the  story  of  Zacchseus  ^  the  epithet  seems  to  express 
a  relation  to  society  rather  than  a  moral  condition.  As 
applied  to  the  chief  publican,  it  describes  the  state  of  one 
who  is  a  victim  of  social  ostracism.  There  is  nothing  in 
the  narrative  to  show  that  he  was  a  bad  man.  They 
called  him  a  "  sinner,"  but  that  was  due  to  popular 
prejudice.  He  was  a  publican,  and  rich  ;  and  no  further 
evidence  of  guilt  was  needed.  What  he  states  con- 
cerning himself  is  very  much  to  his  credit.  For  one 
occupying  the  position  of  a  tax-gatherer  to  give  half  of 
his  goods  to  the  poor,  and  to  restore  fourfold  what  he 
may  have  taken  from  others  in  excess,  argues  no  ordinary 
virtue.  It  has  indeed  been  supposed  that  Zaccha^us 
spoke  of  what  he  meant  to  do  in  future,  rather  than  of 
what  he  had  been  in  the  habit  of  doing.  But  he  spoke 
in  self-defence  against  evil  insinuations,  and  his  words 
would  carry  weight  only  if  they  not  merely  expressed 
purposes  formed  under  a  sudden  impulse,  but  stated 
actual  undeniable  facts.  That  they  did  so  is  a  natural 
inference  from  his  eager  desire  to  see  Jesus.  Evidently 
his  remarkable  behaviour  springs  from  something  deeper 
than  curiosity.  He  has  a  history  which  explains  the 
interest  he  feels  in  the  Man  who  has  the  courage  to  be 
the  publican's  friend.  He  sees  in  Jesus  one  who  does 
not  believe  all  the  evil  things  said  of  an  unpopular  class, 
and  regards  it  as  possible  that  good  may  be  found  even 
among  publicans.  Not  that  he  claims  to  have  a  faultless 
1  Luke  xix.  1. 


138  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

record ;  he  admits  that  he  has  sometimes  yielded  to  the 
strong  temptations  connected  with  his  calling.  But  he 
has  repented  of  the  wrong,  and  has  made  strenuous  efforts 
to  do  justly  and  to  love  mercy.  This  man  is  not  a  lost 
sheep  in  the  moral  sense ;  in  love  of  righteousness  he  is 
one  among  a  thousand.  But  he  is  still  a  social  outcast, 
and  the  Son  of  Man  saves  him  by  giving  him  brotherly 
recognition,  going  to  be  the  guest  of  one  whom  most 
shunned  as  a  leper.^ 

Sometimes  Jesus  used  the  term  "  lost "  as  a  synonym 
for  "  neglected."  So,  for  example,  in  the  instructions  to 
the  disciples  in  connection  with  the  Galilean  mission,  in 
which  they  were  told  not  to  go  into  the  way  of  the 
Gentiles,  or  into  any  city  of  the  Samaritans,  but  to  go 
rather  to  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel?  The 
mission  had  its  origin  in  compassion  for  the  multitude, 
who  appeared  to  the  eye  of  Jesus  as  a  flock  of  sheep 
without  a  shepherd,  scattered  and  faint.  The  pathetic 
description  implies  blame,  but  blame  not  of  the  people 
but  of  their  professional  religious  guides,  who  had 
neglected  their  duty  and  had  laid  themselves  open  to  the 
charge  brought  by  the  prophet  Ezekiel  against  the  shep- 
herds of  Israel  in  his  day :  "  The  diseased  have  ye  not 
strengthened,  neither  have  ye  healed  that  which  was  sick, 
neither  have  ye  bound  up  that  which  was  broken,  neither 
have  ye  brought  again  that  which  was  driven  away ; 
neither  have  ye  sought  that  which  was  lost."  ^  Their 
neglect  made  the  mission  necessary.  The  harvest  was 
great,    but    the    labourers   were     few.      Of    professional 

1  Vid.  Sermon  on  Zacchseus  by  Robertson  of  Brighton,  1st  series. 

2  Matt.  X.  5,  6.  3  Ezek.  xxxiv.  4. 


cheist's  doctrine  of  man.  139 

religious  officials — priests,  scribes,  rabbis — there  was  no 
lack ;  and  if  they  had  been  counted,  the  number  of 
labourers  would  not  have  been  small  But  they  had  no 
sincere  human  sympathy  with  the  people,  and  therefore 
Jesus  left  them  out  of  account  as  not  available  for  the 
harvest  work ;  thus  by  implication  pronouncing  a  very 
severe  censure  on  them.  It  was  a  very  significant  judg- 
ment as  coming  from  Him.  On  some  men's  lips  such  a 
judgment  would  not  amount  to  much.  It  is  not  unusual 
for  enthusiastic  promoters  of  special  movements  to  ignore 
all  but  their  own  associates,  and  practically  to  limit  what 
they  call  "the  Lord's  work"  to  that  which  is  being 
carried  on  under  their  direction.  This  way  of  speaking 
is  often  the  utterance  of  an  offensive  egotism,  and  it  is 
always  indicative  of  weakness.  But  in  Christ  were  no 
egotism  and  vanity  such  as  too  often  reveal  themselves 
in  the  character  of  religious  zealots.  He  was  ever  ready 
to  recognise  work  done  for  the  good  of  men,  even  when 
the  agents  stood  in  no  close  relation  to  Himself.  His 
disciples  might  wish  to  reserve  a  monopoly  of  casting  out 
devils  for  such  as  belonged  to  their  company;  but  if 
devils  were  indeed  cast  out  He  was  satisfied,  it  mattered 
not  by  whom.  "  Forbid  him  not,"  ^  He  said,  with  refer- 
ence to  an  attempt  to  establish  such  a  monopoly,  so 
throwing  His  shield  over  all  whose  aims  are  good,  however 
eccentric  their  methods.  Yet  He  who  spake  that  tolerant 
word  said  also  "the  labourers  are  few,"  so  virtually 
asserting  that  the  whole  established  machinery  for  the 
cure  of  souls  in  Israel  was  useless.  It  was  a  just  judg- 
ment, however  severe.  The  parties  animadverted  on  did 
1  Mark  ix.  39. 


V 


140  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

not  even  pretend  to  be  labourers  in  Christ's  sense. 
Their  business  was  to  attend  to  the  sacrificial  ritual,  to 
copy  and  comment  on  the  Scriptures,  to  study  and  teach 
the  law.  Those  who  neglected  the  feasts,  and  were 
ignorant  of  the  law,  they  dismissed  from  their  thoughts 
with  a  malediction.  Reflecting  on  these  false  shepherds 
of  Israel  and  their  heartless  indifference,  we  perceive 
that  the  prayer  Jesus  exhorted  His  disciples  to  offer  up 
for  the  increase  of  labourers  cannot  have  had  in  view  the 
mere  multiplication  of  persons  professionally  occupied 
with  religion.  It  is  rather  a  prayer  for  increase  of  the 
number  of  men  imbued  with  the  Christian  spirit  of 
hopeful,  helpful  love,  and  might  be  paraphrased  thus : 
"  Father  in  heaven !  pour  out  on  the  world  the  spirit  of 
sympathy.  Now  that  spirit  is  rare.  In  this  land  of 
Israel  it  is  almost  confined  to  the  little  company  gathered 
around  the  Son  of  Man.  We  believe  that-  Thou  takest 
pleasure  in  the  moral  recovery  of  the  lost,  that  the 
fortunes  of  the  poor,  the  suffering,  and  the  erring  are  not 
indifferent  to  Thee.  In  this  faith  we  rejoice,  by  this 
faith  we  are  impelled  to  seek  those  who  have  strayed,  and 
to  do  good  to  all  as  we  have  opportunity.  Let  this 
inspiring  faith,  and  this  enthusiasm  of  love,  prevail  more 
and  more,  till  all  men  believe  in  the  heavenly  Father, 
and  sin  and  misery  have  been  banished  from  the  earth." 

The  prayer,  thus  interpreted  as  involving  a  hidden 
allusion  to  the  prevailing  inhumanity  of  those  who  passed 
for  good,  implies  a  new  idea  of  holiness,  and  throws  light 
on  the  nature  and  extent  of  human  depravity.  "  True 
holiness,"  it  virtually  teaches,  "  consists  in  love.  Nega- 
tive   holiness,    which    carefully    keeps    aloof    from    the 


Christ's  doctkine  of  man.  141 

unholy,  is  a  counterfeit.  Selfishness  is  the  root  of  sin  ; 
and  it  reaches  the  lowest  degree  of  turpitude  when  it  is 
associated  with  religion.  To  be  religious  without  love  is 
to  be  at  the  farthest  possible  distance  from  God  and  true 
righteousness.  Therefore  the  shepherds  of  Israel  who 
pride  themselves  on  their  virtue  and  sanctity,  and  despise 
the  sensual  irreligious  multitude,  are  more  truly  lost  than 
the  sheep  they  neglect,  by  reason  of  that  very  neglect." 

Tested  by  the  law  of  love,  all  men  come  grievously 
short.  The  term  "  lost  "  embraces  the  whole  human  race. 
All  have  gone  astray,  each  one  in  his  own  way  and  in  his 
own  measure.  Selfishness  is  universal,  and  men  are  so 
accustomed  to  it  that  it  hardly  appears  to  them  evil. 
How  different  was  the  view  of  Christ !  In  one  of  His 
most  striking  parables  a  rich  man  is  sent,  at  his  death,  to 
the  place  of  torment  for  no  other  apparent  reason  than 
because  he  lived  in  this  world  a  selfish  life,  enjoying  his 
comforts  and  heedless  of  the  misery  of  his  fellow- 
mortals.^  The  epithet  Trovrjpo^  in  another  part  of  His 
teaching  is  applied  to  the  average  earthly  father  viewed 
simply  as  one  who  falls  short  of  the  divine  standard  of 
charity,  and  allows  a  certain  measure  of  selfishness  to 
enter  into  his  dealings  with  his  children.^  'O  irovT^po^ 
was  His  name  for  the  Evil  One,  Satan ;  ^  yet  He  deemed 
it  not  too  strong  a  term  to  apply  to  men  who,  while 
incapable  of  diabolic  wickedness  such  as  giving  their 
children  a  stone  for  bread,  are  not  always  proof  against 
the  temptation  to  sacrifice  their  children's  interests  to 
their  own  pleasures.     ]^othing  could  more  clearly  show 

1  Luke  xvi.  19.  2  L^i^g  xi.  13. 

3  Matt.  xiii.  19,  29. 


142  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

how  serious  was  the  view  Jesus  took  of  human  depravity, 
than  the  application  of  so  strong  a  term  to  a  form  of 
selfishness  not  uncommon. 

The  fact  that  Jesus,  while  acknowledging  that  His 
mission  was  to  the  whole  of  Israel,  yet  addressed  Himself 
specially  to  the  humbler  classes,  points  to  a  j)ohcy 
deliberately  adopted  for  definite  reasons.  These  reasons 
were  chiefly  two :  belief  in  tlie  greater  receptivity  of 
those  classes  to  the  blessings  of  the  kingdom,  and 
expectation  of  intenser  devotion  to  its  interests.  Jesus 
took  into  account  the  tendency  of  wealth,  happiness,  and 
moral  respectability  to  hide  from  their  possessors  their 
true  character,  to  fill  them  with  self-complacent  thoughts, 
and  to  make  them  indifferent  or  contemptuous  towards  the 
grace  of  God.  Therefore  He  turned  to  those  who  were 
exposed  to  no  such  temptations,  in  hope  to  find  among 
them  less  pride,  prejudice,  self-delusion,  more  insight  into 
the  truth  of  things,  a  deeper  sense  of  the  need  of  pardon,  a 
hunger  of  the  soul  for  righteousness  worthy  of  the  name. 
That  such  considerations  influenced  Him,  we  learn  from 
certain  of  His  sayings.  In  explaining  the  parable  of  the 
Sower,  He  mentioned  the  deceitfulness  of  riches  as  one  of 
tlie  hindrances  to  fruitfulness.-^  After  His  interview  with 
the  young  ruler  who  inquired  concerning  eternal  life.  He 
sadly  remarked,  "  How  hardly  shall  they  that  have  riches 
enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God  !  "  ^  He  meant  to  express 
a  similar  feeling  in  reference  to  the  "  righteous "  when 
He  said,  "  I  came  not  to  call  the  righteous,  but  sinners." 
On  His  defence  for  the  crime  of  consorting  with  those 
whom  the  exemplary  shunned,  He  thereby  intimated  to 
1  Matt.  xiii.  22.  2  Mark  x.  23. 


CHRIST'S  DOCTRINE  OF  MAN.  143 

His  accusers  that  He  called  "  sinners  "  because  they  were 
more  ready  than  the  righteous  to  acknowledge  their  faults, 
and  to  welcome  the  good  news  of  God's  pardoning  love. 

That  Jesus  also  called  the  sinful  because  He  expected 
converts  from  that  class  to  make  the  best  citizens,  we 
learn  from  the  parable  of  the  Two  Debtors  viewed  in  con- 
nection with  its  historical  setting.^  On  that  occasion,  also, 
He  was  on  His  defence  for  His  sympathetic  relations  with 
social  reprobates,  and  the  gist  of  His  apology  was — the 
greater  the  forgiveness,  the  greater  the  love,  and  there- 
fore the  better  the  citizen,  the  test  of  good  citizenship 
being  devotion.  "  Which  of  them  will  love  him  most  ?  " 
He  asked ;  and  his  host,  on  principles  of  common  sense, 
could  only  reply :  "  I  suppose  that  he  to  whom  he  for- 
gave most."  Then  said  He  in  effect :  "  That  is  why  I 
have  relations  with  such  as  this  woman.  I  seek  such  as 
will  love  me,  not  with  cold  civility  as  you  have  done,  but 
ardently  after  the  manner  of  this  penitent.  Such  I  find 
not  among  the  '  righteous,'  but  among  the  '  sinners.'  " 

This  policy  of  Jesus,  to  be  fully  understood  and  appre- 
ciated, must  be  looked  at  in  connection  with  the  peculiar 
religious  condition  of  Jewish  society  in  His  time.  Viewed 
in  the  abstract,  and  conceived  of  as  applicable  indis- 
criminately to  all  communities,  it  may  appear  well 
intended,  but  mistaken.  One  may  not  unnaturally  ask, 
"  Is  it  to  be  inferred  that  had  Christ  lived  in  our  day  and 
country,  He  would  have  expected  to  find  the  best  dis- 
ciples among  what  we  are  accustomed,  from  the  ecclesi- 
astical point  of  view,  to  call  the  '  lapsed  masses,' 
composed  largely  of  persons  who,  w^ithout  any  bread  i 
1  Luke  vii.  36-50. 


144  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

of  charity,  may  be  described  as  weeds  ?  That  they 
should  not  be  neglected  is  of  course  right ;  that  converts 
may  be,  and  have  been  made  among  them,  even  in  large 
numbers,  cannot  be  denied  ;  that  a  few  very  exceptional 
Christians,  like  Bunyan,  have  come  from  their  ranks  is 
cheerfully  admitted  ;  but  surely  the  action  of  Jesus  does 
not  imply  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Church  deliberately 
to  turn  its  attention  to  that  part  of  society  as  the  most 
hopeful  field  ? "  I  do  not  care  to  answer  these  questions 
too  confidently  in  the  negative,  lest  the  judgment  should 
be  but  the  superficial  verdict  of  Pharisaism  in  a  modern 
guise.  I  certainly  believe  that  there  are  many  more 
unpolished  diamonds  hidden  in  the  churchless  mass  of 
humanity  than  the  respectable  church-going  part  of  the 
community  has  any  idea  of.  I  am  even  disposed  to 
think  that  a  great  and  steadily  increasing  portion  of  the 
moral  worth  of  society  lies  outside  the  Church,  separated 
from  it  not  by  godlessness,  but  rather  by  exceptionally 
intense  moral  earnestness.  Many,  in  fact,  have  left  the 
Church  in  order  to  be  Christians.  I  also  believe  in  an 
indefinite  power  of  moral  reaction  even  in  the  most 
depraved,  though  it  is  unhappily  only  too  rarely  exempli- 
fied. Christ  has  taught  us  to  hope  for  wells  of  water 
springing  up  unto  everlasting  life  from  below  the  rocky 
surface  of  inveterate  evil  habits.  Yet,  withal,  there  is  a 
wide  difference  between  Britain  in  the  nineteenth  century 
and  Judaea  in  our  Lord's  day.  In  the  professedly  religious 
portion  of  society  there  is  more  of  the  salt  of  real 
righteousness,  and  in  the  outer  fringe  of  the  churchless 
probably  less  susceptibility  to  good  influence.  The 
strictly  religious  Jews  in  Christ's  time  were  a  compara- 


Christ's  doctrine  of  man.  145 

tively  small  coterie.  Their  righteousness  was,  moreover, 
as  we  shall  see,  a  thoroughly  artificial  system,  too 
elaborate  and  too  unreasonable  for  ordinary  mortals  to 
practise.  The  Pharisees  stood  in  a  relation  to  the  popu- 
lace somewhat  sunilar  to  that  of  the  monks  in  the  Middle 
Ages  to  the  laity.  To  the  esoteric  brotherhood,  in  both 
cases,  the  world  without  appeared  very  unholy.  And 
there  was,  in  truth,  much  licentiousness  among  the 
uninitated ;  for  an  artificial  system  of  morals  is  ever  very 
demoralizing,  not  only  among  those  who  accept  it  as 
their  rule  of  life,  but  among  those  also  who  refuse  to  be 
bound  by  it.  The  latter  deeming  themselves  fully  justi- 
fied in  disregarding  its  arbitrary  requirements,  do  not  stop 
there,  but  indulge  in  indiscriminate  transgression.  But 
the  Jewish  populace  who  knew  not  nor  kept  the  precepts 
of  the  scribes,  Am  Raarez,  "  the  people  of  the  land,"  as 
they  were  contemptuously  called,  were  by  no  means  so 
bad  as  their  self  -  righteous  censors  accounted  them.^ 
Among  them  probably  were  many  who  were  not  Pharisees, 
mainly  because  they  were  comparatively  simple  and 
unsophisticated,  who  were  therefore  not  the  worse  but 
the  better  men  because  they  had  remained  inaccessible 
to  Pharisaic  influences.  Such  might  be  open  to  influence 
of  a  truly  wholesome  kind  like  that  which  Jesus  brought 
to  bear  on  the  "  lost,"  and  might  supply  the  raw  material 

1  According  to  the  tradition  of  the  scribes,  the  Ain  Haarez,  like  tlie 
Samaritan,  was  a  person  with  whom  no  deahngs  should  be  had. 
They  said  :  "  Bear  no  witness  for  him,  take  none  from  him,  reveal 
to  him  no  secret,  entrust  nothing  to  his  charge,  make  him  not 
treasurer  of  monies  for  the  poor,  associate  not  with  him  on  a 
journey."  He  was  exchided  from  sharing  in  the  resurrection.  Vid. 
Weber,  System  der  altsynagogakn  Palastinischen  Theologie,  p.  43. 

K 


146  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

out  of  which  could  be  formed  excellent  citizens  of  the 
divine  commonwealth.  It  was  with  this  conviction  that 
He  devoted  so  much  of  His  time  and  attention  to  them. 
His  example  is  fitted  to  inspire  a  most  hopeful  view  of 
the  redeemableness  of  mankind.  Apart  altogether  from 
His  teaching,  His  public  action  is  itself  a  gospel  of  hope, 
rebuking  cynical  despairing  views  of  human  depravity, 
saying  to  us  :  "  Give  up  no  man  as  irrecoverably  lost," 
reminding  us  that  much  spiritual  susceptibility  may 
slumber  in  most  unexpected  quarters,  and  bidding  us 
look  for  the  most  aggravated  types  of  moral  degeneracy 
from  the  divine  ideal  of  manhood,  not  among  the 
irreligious,  but  among  the  inhumanly  religious. 


CHAPTER  YI. 

THE  RELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES  AND 
FUNCTIONS. 

Not  less  important  than  the  question  as  to  the  attitude 
of  Jesus  towards  the  Mosaic  Law,  is  the  inquiry  in  what 
relation  He  stood  to  the  Messianic  hopes  current  among 
the  Jewish  people  in  His  time.  The  inquiry  has  two 
aspects,  one  referring  to  the  extent  of  our  Lord's  sym- 
pathy with  prevailing  Messianic  ideas,  the  other  to  His 
claim  to  be  the  Messiah.  The  two  topics  are  closely 
related,  but  they  may,  to  a  certain  extent,  be  looked  at 
apart.  Even  if  Jesus  had  not  claimed  to  be  the  Christ, 
He  would  still  have  had  to  adjust  Himself  to  a  concep- 
tion shared  by  nearly  the  whole  of  His  countrymen,  based 
on  Hebrew  prophecy,  and  received  as  a  sacred  inheritance 
from  the  Fathers. 

A  priori  it  was  to  be  expected  that  Jesus  would  have 
His  Messianic  idea.  Eor  the  ideas  of  a  Messiah  and  a 
kingdom  of  God  were  kindred,  and  one  who  made  the 
latter  theme  the  burden  of  his  preaching  could  not  fail  to 
Jiave  a  Messianic  theory  and  belief.  The  two  subjects 
were  closely  associated,  not  only  in  Hebrew  prophecy, 
but  in  the  nature  of  things. 

147 


148  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

What,  then,  was  the  position  taken  up  by  the  Herald 
of  the  kingdom  on  this  burning  question  ?  The  opinion 
of  Dr.  Baur  on  the  point  is  well  known.  In  his  view, 
the  Messianic  idea  had  no  vitality  for  Jesus.  The  pro- 
phet of  Nazareth  was  a  purely  ethical  teacher,  who  would 
gladly  have  ignored  a  hope  with  which  at  heart  He  had 
no  sympathy,  and  which  He  knew  to  be  a  delusion.  But 
being  a  Jew,  He  was  obliged  to  recognise  the  national 
expectation,  however  distasteful  to  His  own  feelings, 
and  speak  as  if  He  regarded  it  as  important ;  nay.  He 
was  compelled  reluctantly  to  let  Himself  be  taken  for 
the  Messiah,  as  the  indispensable  condition  of  success  on 
Jewish  soil  in  an  attempt  to  introduce  a  new  universal 
religion. 

The  truth  of  this  view  must  be  acknowledged  to  the 
extent  of  admitting  that  there  was  much  in  the  conven- 
tional Messianic  idea  with  which  Jesus  was  not  in  accord. 
His  habitual  reticence  regarding  His  own  claims  to  be 
the  Christ  is  sufficient  evidence  of  the  fact.  That  reti- 
cence might  be  adduced  as  a  proof  that  His  conception 
of  the  kingdom  was  peculiar ;  for  King  and  kingdom 
correspond,  and  divergent  thoughts  as  to  the  nature  of 
the  one  imply  an  analogous  divergence  in  reference  to 
the  other.  It  shows  that  Christ's  idea  of  the  kingdom 
must  have  been  different  even  from  that  of  the  Baptist ; 
for  the  preacher  of  repentance  practised  no  reserve  on 
the  subject,  but  spoke  openly  of  a  Coming  One  whose 
shoe-latchet  he  was  not  worthy  to  unloose.  But  the 
point  insisted  on  now  is  the  significance  of  that  reticence 
as  an  index  of  Christ's  position  in  reference  to  the 
Messianic  hope.     It  betrayed  a  consciousness  that  His 


RELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  149 

thoughts  theieon  were  not  those  of  the  Jewish  people, 
giving  rise  to  a  natural  unwillingness  to  say  much  on  a 
subject  on  which  it  was  difficult  to  speak  without  being 
misunderstood.  It  did  not,  however,  imply,  as  Baur 
imagined,  that  Jesus  had  no  Messianic  convictions,  but 
merely  adapted  Himself  prudentially  to  those  of  others. 
It  is  not  credible  that  He  would  be  guilty  of  such  insin- 
cerity, any  more  than  that  such  a  policy,  if  adopted,  could 
be  successful.  Had  the  Messianic  idea  in  every  form  been 
void  of  all  validity  for  His  mind.  He  would  certainly 
have  discarded  it  and  taken  the  consequences.  For  the 
sincere  man,  religious  beliefs  current  in  his  time,  which 
he  cannot  accept,  must  either  be  rejected  or  transformed. 
The  Messianic  faith  of  Israel  could  not  be  absolutely 
rejected,  because  it  contained  elements  of  truth,  and 
therefore  the  only  possible  alternative  was  transforma- 
tion. Christ's  position  in  reference  to  it  can  be  partly 
understood  through  our  own  in  reference  to  an  idea  of 
vital  significance  in  Christian  piety.  It  is  essential 
to  a  religion  bearing  Christ's  name  that  it  be  evangelic, 
for  that  is  only  to  say  that  it  must  conform  to  the  teach- 
ing and  spirit  of  our  Lord  as  exhibited  in  the  Gospels. 
Yet  the  term  has  been  so  often  associated  with  a  legal 
spirit  in  theology  and  life,  that  one  earnestly  minded  to 
follow  the  Master  feels  the  need  either  of  a  new  word  or 
of  a  very  discriminating  use  of  the  old  one.  Even  so 
was  it  with  the  Master  Himself  in  regard  to  the  Jewish 
hope  of  a  Messiah.  The  word  expressed  a  faith  in  a 
bright  future  for  the  world,  which  no  one  not  given  over 
to  atheistic  pessimism  would  consent  to  part  with.  Never- 
theless, in  current  use  it  was  so  mixed  up  with  idle  dreams, 


150  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

ambitious  passions,  false  opinions,  and  sham  sanctities, 
that  one  wishing  to  hold  fast  his  belief  in  the  divine 
reality  was  under  the  necessity  of  breaking  with  tradition, 
and  rediscovering  the  truth  for  himself  ;  and  having  found 
it,  of  uttering  his  thoughts  concerning  it,  as  one  conscious 
of  isolation. 

We  may  conceive  of  Jesus  as  going  forth  to  His  public 
ministry  with  transformed  ideas  both  of  the  Messianic 
office  and  of  the  Messianic  kingdom.  His  spiritual 
nature  determined  the  form  of  the  Messianic  idea,  gather- 
ing up  as  by  elective  affinity  the  congenial  elements  of 
Old  Testament  prophecy.  Ample  materials  for  such  a 
transformation  were  to  be  found  in  texts  which  suggested 
the  notion  of  a  gentle,  missionary,  suffering  Messiah 
gaining  power  by  meekness,  by  His  wisdom  giving  light 
to  the  world,  bearing  the  sins  and  miseries  of  men  by 
sympathy  as  a  burden  on  His  heart.  The  first  evangelist, 
who  has  taken  pains  to  illustrate  his  narrative  by  pro- 
phetic citations,  quotes  some  of  these  texts,  giving  pro- 
minence to  that  which  describes  the  Messiah  as  one  who 
shall  not  strive  nor  cry,  and  who  also  shall  not  break  the 
bruised  reed  or  quench  the  smoking  flax.^  The  oracle 
is  introduced  in  connection  with  directions  given  by 
Jesus  to  the  sick  people  whom  He  healed,  that  they 
should  not  make  Him  known.  This  retiring  habit  in 
one  possessing  such  powers  seemed  to  the  evangelist  very 
remarkable.  And  so  indeed  it  was.  It  was  utterly 
contrary  to  the  spirit  of  the  world,  which  pursues  the 
policy  of  self-advertisement  and  self-assertion  with  a  view 
to  gratify  personal  ambition,  and  works  by  ostentation  and 
1  Matt.  xii.  18-21.     Tlie  quotation  is  from  Isa.  xlii.  1-4. 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  151 

conflict ;  by  the  one  seeking  public  applause,  by  the  other 
striving  to  overcome  obstacles.  It  was  this  way  the 
brethren  of  Jesus  desired  Him  to  adopt  when  they 
counselled  Him  to  go  up  to  Judtea  to  show  His  works, 
reckoning  it  foolish  in  one  who  had  it  in  His  power  to 
become  celebrated  to  remain  in  obscurity.^  But  such 
counsel,  whether  given  by  the  god  of  this  world  or  by  its 
children,  Jesus  ever  declined  to  follow.  He  would  not 
strive,  but  when  His  acts  or  words  provoked  hostility,  as 
in  the  instance  recorded  by  Matthew  before  citing  the 
prophetic  oracle,  He  withdrew  from  the  scene.  Neither 
would  He  cry  or  lift  up  His  voice  in  the  streets,  follow- 
ing the  methods  of  those  who  hunt  after  fame ;  He  rather 
took  as  much  pains  to  hide  His  good  deeds  as  others  took 
to  make  theirs  widely  known.  Yet  He  was  ever  willing 
to  do  deeds  of  kindness ;  when  suffering  multitudes 
gathered  around  Him  in  season  or  out  of  season.  He 
healed  them  all.  His  was  a  spirit  of  gentleness,  humility, 
and  sympathy  :  of  gentleness  towards  opponents,  of  humi- 
lity in  shunning  vainglorious  display,  of  sympathy  shown 
in  pity  for  the  sick  and  in  patience  with  spiritual  weak- 
ness. Such  were  the  attributes  of  Jesus.  Such  were 
the  attributes  of  the  Servant  of  Jehovah,  as  described  by 
the  prophet,  which  made  Him  God's  well-beloved  and 
elect  One,  and  proved  that  God's  Spirit  was  in  Him. 
The  evangelist  was  struck  with  the  correspondence ;  and 
with  true  insight  discerned  in  the  character  of  Jesus,  as 
revealed  in  His  actions,  the  fulfilment  of  the  oracle.  We 
cannot  doubt  that  the  significance  of  the  prophetic  utter- 
ance was  as  apparent  to  Jesus  Himself  as  to  His  disciple, 
1  John  vii.  3,  4. 


152  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

and  that  it  was  one  of  the  ancient  texts  from  which  He 
drew  His  idea  of  the  Messiah. 

In  a  Messiah  of  the  type  therein  sketched  Jesus  could 
earnestly  believe.  No  other  type  of  Messiah  could  have 
any  attractions  for  Him :  not  the  political  Messiah  of  the 
Zealots,  whose  one  desire  was  national  independence  ;  not 
the  Messiah  of  common  expectation,  who  should  flatter 
l^opular  prejudices  and  make  himself  an  idol  by  becom- 
ing a  slave ;  not  the  Messiah  of  the  Pharisees,  himself 
a  Pharisee,  regarding  it  as  his  vocation  to  deliver  Israel 
from  Pagan  impurity ;  ^  not  even  the  austere  Messiah 
of  the  Baptist,  who  was  to  separate  the  good  from  the 
evil  by  a  process  of  judicial  severity,  and  so  usher  in  a 
kingdom  of  righteousness.  The  Messiah  devoutly  to  be 
longed  for,  and  cordially  to  be  welcomed  when  He  came, 
in  His  view,  was  one  who  should  conquer  by  the  might 
of  love  and  truth  ;  who  should  meet  the  deepest  wants 
of  man,  not  merely  gratify  the  wishes  of  Jews,  and  prove 
a  light  and  a  saviour  to  the  whole  world  ;  who  should 
be  conspicuous  by  patience  and  hopefulness  rather  than 
by  inexorable  sternness, — a  humane,  universal,  spiritual 
Messiah,  answering  to  a  divine  kingdom  of  kindred 
character, — the  desire  of  all  nations,  the  fulfilment  of 
humanity's  deepest  longings,  therefore  not  destined  to  be 
superseded,  but  to  remain  an  Eternal  Christ,  the  same 
yesterday,  to-day,  and  for  ever. 

^  Montet  {Essai  sur  les  Origlnes  des  Partis  Saduceen  et  Pharisien^ 
p.  247)  remarks  of  the  Messiah  described  in  the  Psalteriuiu 
Salomonis,  which  was  purely  Pharisaic  in  spirit :  "  We  are  tempted 
to  say  that  he  (Messiah)  is  a  separatist  Pliarisaic  king,  who  will 
deliver  Israel  from  Pagan  uncleanness."  The  remark  rests  on  the 
words  :  pvaeroci  ^f^oig  oixu  clKa,6oi.paix;  l^^puv  (iiilvi'huv  (xvii.  51). 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  153 

Such  a  Messiah  Jesus  not  merely  believed  in,  but 
claimed  Himself  to  be.  The  claim  finds  expression  in 
many  of  His  recorded  words,  and  underlies  the  whole 
evangelic  history  from  beginning  to  end.  It  is  implied 
in  the  announcement  of  the  kingdom  as  prese^it  It  is 
implied  also  in  the  titles  Son  of  Man  and  Son  of  God, 
which,  as  we  shall  see,  sprang  out  of  a  Messianic  con- 
sciousness. It  is  indirectly  asserted  in  such  sayings 
as  these :  "  I  say  unto  you,  that  in  this  place  is  One 
greater  than  the  temple ; "  -^  "  Behold,  a  greater  than 
Jonas  is  here ; "  ^  "  Behold,  a  greater  than  Solomon  is 
here."  ^  It  lurks  in  the  title  "  Bridegroom  "  ^  applied  by 
Jesus  to  Himself,  a  title  applied  by  the  prophets  to 
Jehovah  in  relation  to  the  covenant  people,  and  teaching 
that  in  Him  to  whom  it  is  given  the  soul  finds  its  Lord 
and  the  fulness  of  spiritual  bliss.  It  was  involved  in 
the  tacit  acceptance  by  Jesus  of  the  epithet  "  the  Coming 
One "  employed  by  the  Baptist  in  his  doubting  message 
to  describe  the  Christ.^  It  found  utterance  in  the 
prophetic  discourse  on  the  irapovala  in  the  solemn 
declaration,  "  Heaven  and  earth  shall  pass  away,  but  My 
words  shall  not  pass  away."  ^  Specially  significant  is  the 
text  in  which,  after  condemning  the  Pharisaic  lust  for 
titles  of  honour,  Jesus  gives  His  disciples  the  counsel  : 
"  Be  not  ye  called  Eabbi,  for  one  is  your  Master,  and  all 
ye  are  brethren."^  There  can  be  no  doubt  who  the 
hMaKoXo^  is:  the  word  finds  its  interpretation  in  the 

1  Matt.  xii.  6.  -  Matt.  xii.  41. 

3  Matt.  xii.  42.  *  Matt.  ix.  15. 

5  Matt.  xi.  3.  ^  Matt.  xxiv.  35. 

^  Matt,  xxiii.  8.  The  words  6  XpiuTog  are  a  gloss. 


154  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

fact  that  the  Speaker  stood  in  the  relation  of  Master  to 
His  hearers.  This  claim  to  be  the  one  Master,  taken 
in  connection  with  the  condemnation  of  pretensions  to 
Mastership,  can  escape  the  charge  of  inconsistency  only 
on  the  supposition  that  He  who  makes  the  claim  is 
conscious  of  being  an  exceptional  person  who  without 
arrogance  may  say  to  men  :  "  Learn  from  Me,"  ^  take  Me 
as  your  supreme  teacher  and  guide  in  religion.  Similar 
reflections  apply  to  Christ's  mode  of  enforcing  lessons  of 
humility  by  jDrescribing  Himself  as  an  example ;  as  on 
the  occasion  when  the  sons  of  Zebedee  advanced  their 
ambitious  request,  when  He  said :  "  Whosoever  will  be 
chief  among  you,  let  him  be  your  servant ;  even  as  the 
Son  of  Man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to 
minister." '  This  was  spoken  out  of  the  consciousness 
of  being  the  first  in  the  kingdom — king  by  right,  though 
servant  by  choice ;  and  the  implied  claim  is  accentuated 
from  being  uttered  in  connection  with  a  rebuke  of 
ambitious  passions.  In  one  notable  instance  Jesus 
asserted  His  superhuman  greatness  even  in  the  very  act 
of  limiting  it,  viz.  when  He  declared  His  ignorance  of 
the  last  day,  saying,  "  Concerning  that  day,  or  that  hour, 
no  one  knoweth,  neither  angel  in  heaven,  nor  the  Son, 
absolutely  no  one,  save  the  Father."  ^  Nescience  is  here 
professed  in  a  manner  involving  a  claim  to  a  very  high 
position  in  the  scale  of  being,  superior  to  that  of  angels, 
subordinate  only  to  that  of  the  Supreme. 

Jesus    proclaimed     Himself    to    be    the    Messiah    by 
ascribing  to  Himself  Messianic  functions.     Thus  we  find 

1  Matt.  xi.  20.     /xcchTS  «7r'  iuoO. 

2  Matt.  XX.  28.  '  3  Mark  xiii.  32. 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  155 

Him  in  many  utterances  representing  Himself  as  the  Judge 
of  the  world ;  as  in  the  saying,  "  The  Son  of  Man  is 
about  to  come  in  the  glory  of  His  Father,  with  His 
angels,  and  then  shall  He  give  to  every  one  according  to 
his  works."  ^  Baur,  while  admitting  the  fact  as  indis- 
putable, resolves  the  judicial  action  of  Jesus  into  a 
purely  ethical  process.  Jesus  judges  men  by  His 
doctrines,  which  are  the  fundamental  laws  of  the  divine 
kingdom,  because  according  to  the  attitudes  they  assume 
towards  these,  men  divide  themselves  into  two  morally 
distinct  classes.  He  judges  them  by  His  own  person, 
because  He  is  the  concrete  embodiment  of  the  absolute 
worth  of  His  teaching.  Baur  doubts  whether  Jesus  ever 
spoke  of  His  judicial  function  in  such  terms  as  those  in 
which  He  appears  promising  to  the  twelve  seats  of  judg- 
ment beside  Himself  in  the  iraXLyyevecTLa,  discovering  in 
the  words  an  eschatological  colouring  arising  out  of  gross 
popular  ideas  of  the  coming  Messianic  kingdom.  In  the 
representation  of  the  judgment  in  Matt.  xxv.  he  finds 
simply  a  parabolic  embodiment  of  the  judicial  power  of 
Christ's  doctrine.  The  good  per  se  is  personified  in 
Jesus,  and  men  who  do  the  good  for  its  own  sake,  living 
loving  lives,  are  represented  as  unawares  doing  kind 
actions  to  Him.  Be  it  so ;  what  a  high  claim  even  this 
view  of  Christ's  judicial  function  involves !  It  implies 
that  Jesus  regarded  Himself  as  the  moral  idea  realized. 

1  Matt.  xvi.  27.  This  is  a  new  feature  in  the  conception  of  y 
Messiah.  In  pre-Christian  Jewish  literature  the  function  of  judge 
is  not  ascribed  to  the  Messiah.  Such  an  ascription  does  indeed 
occur  in  a  certain  part  of  the  Book  of  Enoch.  But  this  part  is  by 
many  scholars  regarded  as  of  post-Christian  date.  Vide  next 
chapter. 


156  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Jesus  advanced  His  claim  to  Messiahship  in  a  more 
genial  way  by  proclaiming  Himself  to  be  the  Saviour  of 
men.  This  He  did  under  various  forms  of  representation; 
at  one  time  announcing  Himself  as  the  Shepherd  of 
Israel,  sent  to  seek  the  lost  sheep ;  at  another  as  the 
Physician  of  souls,  whose  vocation  it  was  to  heal  the 
spiritually  diseased ;  on  other  occasions  exercising 
saving  power  by  forgiving  sin.  The  whole  ministry  of 
miraculous  healing  may  be  regarded  as  an  exhibition  of 
Messianic  resources  brought  into  play  for  the  good  of 
men.  It  was  the  saving  grace  of  Messiah  active  in  the 
physical  sphere,  and  giving  to  His  work  as  Eedeemer 
a  comprehensiveness  and  completeness  answering  to  the 
requirements  of  the  Messianic  ideal.  It  was  meet  that 
there  should  be  a  wealth  of  salvation,  a  plenteous 
redemption,  in  the  promised  Deliverer,  and  the  presence 
of  these  in  the  ministry  of  Jesus  pointed  Him  out  as  the 
fulfiller  of  the  promise. 

Once  more,  Jesus  declared  Himself  to  be  the  Messiah 
by  claiming  to  be  the  Bevealer  of  God  as  Father,  as  in 
the  memorable  words :  "  No  man  knoweth  the  Father, 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  is  pleased 
to  reveal  Him."  ^  By  the  solemn  affirmation  Jesus 
raised  Himself,  not  only  above  rabbinical  teachers,  whose 
chief  function,  in  effect,  if  not  in  intention,  was  to  hide 
God  from  men,  but  even  above  the  prophets,  through 
whom  God  made  a  partial,  fragmentary,  piecemeal 
revelation  of  His  nature  and  will.  He  claimed  to  be  in 
possession  of  a  full,  adequate,  absolutely  true  knowledge 
of  God,  for  all  tliis  is  implied  in  knowing  the  Father; 
1  Matt.  xi.  27. 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  157 

and  He  represented  Himself  as  possessing  this  knowledge 
in  virtue  of  His  relation  to  God  as  a  Son.  The  Son 
knows  the  Father's  heart,  and  can  reveal  its  inmost 
thoughts.  Jesus  offers  Himself  to  the  world  as  one 
occupying  this  unique  position,  the  complete  final  exegete 
of  the  Divine  Being.  He  could  not  advance  a  more 
imposing  claim,  neither  could  He  offer  Himself  as  a 
Messiah  in  a  more  acceptable  form.  A  Messiah  who 
can  reveal  God  must  ever  be  welcome,  for  the  knowledge 
of  God  is  man's  supreme  need.  A  Christ  who  tells  us 
of  a  Divine  Father  will  never  go  out  of  fashion  or  be 
superseded ;  for  "  to-day,  to-morrow,  and  for  ever,  we 
can  know  nothing  better  than  that  God  is  our  Father, 
and  that  the  Father  is  the  rest  of  our  souls."  ^  This  is 
a  Christ  for  all  the  world,  as  well  as  for  all  time,  a 
universal  human  Messiah,  in  whom  all  the  nations  gladly 
put  their  trust. 

Jesus  asserted  His  Messiahship  in  yet  another  way, 
viz.  by  demanding  or  accepting  Messianic  honours. 
Meek,  humble  in  spirit,  He  nevertheless  ever  assumed 
the  position  of  Lord.  "  Follow  Me "  was  the  word  of 
command  He  addressed  to  those  whom  He  desired  to 
become  disciples,  at  the  very  commencement  of  His 
public  ministry.^  And  the  conditions  of  service  He 
imposed  on  His  followers  w^ere  very  exacting.  He 
required  them  to  leave  all  for  His  sake, — dearest  friends, 
most  valued  possessions ;  such  as  shrank  from  the 
sacrifice  He  deemed  unw^orthy  of  the  name  of  a  disciple. 
He  put  Himself  on  a  level  with  the  kingdom ;  whatever 
men  were  required  to  do  out  of  regard  to  its  interests, 

1  Keim,  Geschichte  Jesu  von  Nazara,  ii.  385.  ^  Mark  i.  27. 


1/ 


158  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

they  must  be  ready  to  do  for  Him.  "For  the  kingdom's 
sake,"  and  "  for  My  sake,"  He  treated  as  expressions  of 
equal  vahie.  In  other  words.  He  claimed  to  be  the 
Messianic  King :  not  merely  the  Herald  of  the  kingdom, 
but  its  highest  personage. 

That  Jesus  habitually,  and  from  the  first,  regarded 
Himself  as  the  Messiah,  is  thus  beyond  all  reasonable 
doubt.  How  did  He  arrive  at  this  view  of  His  vocation  ; 
what  was  the  genesis  of  His  Messianic  consciousness  ? 
No  answer  to  the  question  can  be  accepted  which  does 
not  respect  the  humility  of  Jesus.  He  certainly  did  not 
elect  Himself  to  this  high  career.  "  No  man  taketh  this 
honour  unto  himself,  but  he  that  is  called  of  God ; "  ^  no 
man  such  as  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  absolutely  free  from 
self-seeking  and  ambitious  passions.  It  is  not  credible 
that  He  set  Himself  to  invent  a  new  idea  of  Messiah, 
combining  in  one  the  gentle  and  warlike  elements  in 
prophetic  representations,  and  then  going  forth  to  try 
by  experiment  how  the  new  scheme  of  a  Messiah 
conquering  by  patience  would  work.^  He  entered  on 
His  Messianic  vocation  simply  as  one  obeying  a  divine 
summons.^  How  the  call  was  communicated  we  can 
only  conjecture.  We  may  think  of  the  secret  of  His 
birth  revealed  to  Him  by  His  parents,  of  His  Davidic 

1  Heb.  V.  4. 

2  So  ill  effect  Mr.  Arnold.     Vid.  Literature  and  Dogma,  p.  96. 

3  This  must  ever  be  borne  in  mind  when  we  speak  of  Christ's 
claim  to  be  Messiah,  a  word  which  readily  suggests  the  idea  of 
ambitious  pretensions.  On  this  point  it  has  been  M'ell  remarked  by 
a  recent  writer  :  "  It  is  not  a  question  of  the  claims  of  Jesus  and  their 
validity.  The  question  which  presented  itself  to  Him  was  whether 
He  could   righteously  withdraw  from  the  clearly  discerned  will 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  159 

descent,  of  His  significant  name  Jesus,  as  suggesting  the 
thought  that  God  had  appointed  Him  to  a  unique  career. 
But  these  alone  would  hardly  suffice  to  give  the  necessary 
assurance.  Probably  the  chief  guidance  came  from 
within,  from  the  spiritual  endowments  wherewith  the 
soul  of  Jesus  was  richly  furnished.  In  this  connection 
stress  has  been  laid  on  His  perfect  holiness.  In  that 
sinless  life  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a  kingdom  of  righteous- 
ness was  realized  in  germ.  The  kingdom  which  had  been 
long  looked  for  was  at  length  come  in  the  person  of  the 
Holy  One,  and  He  Himself  must  be  the  Messiah.^ 
Doubtless  moral  purity  was  one  source  of  the  Messianic 
consciousness.  But  one  shrinks  from  the  thought  of 
Jesus  arriving  by  reflection  on  His  own  personal  holi- 
ness at  the  conclusion  that  He  was  the  Messiah.  It 
gives  to  His  Messianic  consciousness  an  aspect  of  self- 
righteousness.  The  inference  from  the  spotless  life  to 
the  Messianic  vocation  is  just,  but  it  seems  one  more 
appropriate  for  us  to  draw  than  for  Jesus.  I  prefer 
therefore  to  look  in  the  direction  of  the  deep  intense 
human  sympathies  with  which  the  heart  of  Jesus  was 
filled.  Love  is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law,  and  the  destined 
Messiah  was  conscious  of  His  sinlessness  in  the  form  of 
a  consuming  passion  of  filial  love  to  His  Father,  and  of 

of  God.  His  coming  forth  as  Messiah  was  not  usurpation,  but 
obedience ;  not  free  choice,  but  inevitable  divine  necessity." 
Baldensperger,  Das  Selbstbeivusstsein  Jesu  im  Lichte  der  Messianischen 
Hoffnungen  seiner  Zeit,  1888,  vid.  S.  191.  In  his  account  of  the 
development  of  the  Messianic  consciousness  of  Jesus,  Baldensperger 
lays  stress,  as  is  done  in  the  text,  on  His  intense  sympathy  with  His 
oppressed  brethren  and  fellow-countrymen. 
^  So  Weiss,  Das  Leben  Jesu,  i.  290. 


160  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

compassionate  love  for  men.  And  it  was  under  the 
impulse  of  that  mighty  love  that  He  went  forth  to  do 
His  work,  scarce  daring  to  think  Himself  the  Christ,  yet 
knowing  full  well  that  the  work  to  which  His  love 
impelled  Him  was  just  the  work  Messiah  had  to  do. 
Through  that  love  His  Father  seemed  to  say  to  Him, 
Go  forth  to  heal  the  world's  woes,  and  He  loyally 
obeyed  the  call,  walking  by  faith,  and  expecting  con- 
firmations that  He  had  rightly  interpreted  the  divine 
will. 

This  view  is  in  accordance  with  the  account  given 
by  Luke  of  our  Lord's  appearance  in  the  synagogue  of 
Nazareth.^  The  text  on  which  He  discoursed  there 
represents  Messiah's  outfit  as  consisting  in  an  abundant 
anointing  with  the  Spirit  of  love.  If  the  text  was  given 
to  His  hand  in  the  lesson  of  the  day,  He  accepted  it  as 
a  most  congenial  one  wherefrom  to  discourse  on  the 
Messianic  vocation.  A  sceptical  criticism  may  indeed 
doubt  whether  any  reference  was  made  by  Jesus  to  the 
prophetic  oracle  quoted  by  the  third  evangelist,  tracing 
its  presence  in  the  Gospel  to  the  Pauline  bias  of  the 
writer  leading  him  to  select  it  as  a  motto.  The  scepticism 
is  excessive,  for  even  Mark's  narrative  implies  that  a 
very  remarkable  discourse  had  been  delivered  by  Jesus 
to  His  fellow-townsmen ;  ^  but  even  granting  it  to  be 
well  founded,  one  can  only  say  that  Luke  has  shown 
excellent  judgment  in  the  selection  of  his  motto.  No 
Old  Testament  text  could  more  felicitously  interpret 
the  Messianic  consciousness  of  Jesus,  or  more  faithfully 
express  the  general  drift  of  His  ministry.  This  assertion 
1  Luke  iv.  14-20.  2  ^yiaik  vi.  2. 


RELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  161 

rests  on  His  own  testimony,  as  contained  in  the  well- 
authenticated  account  He  gave  of  His  own  work  in  His 
reply  to  the  doubting  message  of  the  Baptist.  "Art 
Thou  He  that  should  come,  or  do  we  look  for  another  ? " 
asked  John.  What  was  the  answer  of  Jesus  ?  "  Go  and 
show  John  again  those  things  which  ye  do  hear  and  see. 
The  blind  receive  their  sight,  and  the  lame  walk,  the 
lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf  hear,  the  dead  are 
raised  up,  and  the  poor  have  the  gospel  preached  to 
them."^  He  expected  the  report  of  such  events,  duly 
weighed,  to  solve  John's  doubts.  It  is  reasonable  to 
assume  that  what  He  regarded  as  good  evidence  for 
John  He  had  found  helpful  to  Himself.  The  love  out 
of  which  the  healing  miracles  and  the  evangelizing  of 
the  poor  had  flowed  had  been  to  Him  the  token  of  His 
Messianic  vocation. 

There  is  no  indication  in  the  records  that  Jesus  was 
ever  visited  by  doubts  concerning  His  Messiahship,  such 
as  those  which  distracted  the  mind  of  the  Baptist.  His 
path  as  the  Christ  appears  ever  to  have  been  illumined 
by  the  light  of  faith.  Nevertheless  it  was  a  path  of 
faith,  of  a  faith  subject  to  trial,  and  standing  in  need  of 
confirmation.  The  whole  life  of  Jesus  is  represented  in 
the  New  Testament  as  a  walking  by  faith  wherein  He 
is  our  example,  and  it  could  not  be  appropriately  so 
characterized  if  so  momentous  a  matter  as  His  Messianic 
consciousness  were  exempted  from  faith's  scope.  The 
experiences  of  His  ministry  supplied  material  for  severe 
trials  of  His  faith  in  reference  thereto.  There  were 
temptations  to  entertain  false  views  of  Messiah's  office, 

^  Matt.  xi.  4. 
L 


162  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

arising  out  of  the  popular  enthusiasm  awakened  by  His 
words  and  deeds ;  temptations  to  distrust  His  own  true 
conception,  arising  out  of  the  antagonism  of  the  wise  and 
religious,  and  the  sincere  doubt  of  such  a  man  as  John ; 
temptations  springing  from  the  prospect  of  a  tragic  end 
to  regard  His  whole  career  as  a  gigantic  mistake  and 
failure.  These  temptations  were  successfully  resisted, 
but  not  without  moral  effort.  The  Messianic  conscious- 
ness advanced  onwards  from  the  morning  twilight  to 
the  perfect  day ;  but  it  remained  unclouded  through 
strenuous  use  of  aids  to  faith.  The  chief  aid  was 
habitual  close  fellowship  with  the  Father  in  heaven. 
In  the  healing  miracles,  wrought  in  a  spirit  of  depend- 
ence, and  "  by  the  finger  of  God,"  ^  the  Worker  had 
sensible  evidence  that  "  God  was  with  Him,"  ^  and  was 
owning  Him  as  the  Christ.  Special  aids  were  not 
wanting  at  critical  periods.  The  incidents  connected 
with  the  baptism  supplied  one  at  the  commencement. 
The  voice  from  heaven,  however  viewed,  points  to  con- 
firmation needed  and  given  to  the  purpose  already 
formed  to  enter  on  a  Messianic  career.  Jesus  came  to 
the  Jordan  thinking  of  Himself  as  the  well-beloved  elect 
One  of  Messianic  prophecy,^  and  after  His  baptism  He  felt 
assured  that  in  this  He  was  not  mistaken.  The  tempta- 
tion  in   the  wilderness  immediately  following  supplied 

1  Luke  xi.  20.  Matthew's  expression  (xii.  28)  is  "by  tlie  Spirit 
of  God."     On  the  two  expressions,  vide  Introduction,  p.  17. 

2  Acts  X.  39. 

8  The  voice  from  heaven  at  the  Jordan,  repeated  at  the  Trans- 
figuration, is  an  echo  of  Isa.  xlii.  1,  cf.  Matt.  xii.  18.  This  points  to 
that  proplietic  passage  as  an  important  factor  in  the  formation  of 
Christ's  Messianic  idea. 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES.  163 

another  important  aid.  Whatever  conception  we  form 
of  that  mysterious  experience,  we  must  hold  that  it 
involved  at  least  a  mental  process  through  which  Jesus 
gained  a  clear  view  of  the  true  vocation  of  Messiah  as 
opposed  to  the  false.  He  left  the  wilderness  under- 
standing well  that  the  genuine  Christ  of  God  could  not 
be  a  self-pleaser  either  in  spirit  or  in  lot. 

The  connected  scenes  at  Coesarea  Philippi  and  on  the 
Mount  of  Transfiguration  had  an  important  bearing  on  the 
self-consciousness  of  Christ.  At  that  late  time  it  was 
becoming  increasingly  apparent  that  the  career  of  the 
Prophet  of  Nazareth  was  to  terminate  tragically.  Judged 
by  the  vulgar  test  of  success,  it  might  already  be  pro- 
nounced a  failure,  and  looking  forward  ignominy  and 
death  seemed  probable.  Could  He  be  the  Christ  who 
had  such  a  prospect  before  Him  ?  The  question,  it 
cannot  be  doubted,  exercised  much  the  thoughts  of  Jesus 
in  those  days.  From  the  outset  He  understood  that 
sorrow  awaited  Him ;  but  when  the  cross  stared  Him  in 
the  face,  it  needed  a  firm  grasp  of  truth  to  enable  Him 
to  meet  His  fate  calmly.  It  was  a  time  demanding 
earnest  meditation  and  prayer.  Through  these  Jesus 
arrived  at  a  clear  conviction  that  the  cross,  instead  of 
being  a  sign  of  mistake  or  failure,  was  the  inevitable  goal 
for  all  who  were  loyal  to  the  kingdom  and  to  righteous- 
ness, and  in  a  superlative  degree  for  the  Messianic  King. 
This  view  had  full  possession  of  His  mind  when  He 
made  His  Messiahship  a  subject  of  conversation  with  His 
disciples  at  Csesarea  Philippi.  He  therefore  took  that 
step,  not  so  much  with  a  view  to  confirmation  of  His 
own  faith,   as  to  confirm  the   faith  of  His  companions. 


164  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

He  desired  to  elicit  from  them  a  confession  of  His 
Messianic  claims  before  speaking  to  them  of  His 
approaching  sufferings.  Yet  we  cannot  doubt  that  He 
found  comfort  in  the  hearty,  unhesitating  response  of 
Peter  speaking  in  the  name  of  all.  As  at  a  former  time 
the  attachment  of  the  "  babes  "  was  a  solace  to  His  heart 
in  presence  of  the  unbelief  of  the  wise  and  understand- 
ing, so  now  the  earnest  faith  of  the  twelve  consoled  Him 
under  the  prospect  of  unbelief  speedily  ripening  into 
deadly  hatred.  In  view  of  that  faith  He  felt  sure  of  the 
future,  whatever  might  happen.  Out  of  it  would  spring 
a  Church  strong  as  the  gates  of  Hades. 

In  the  Transfiguration  scene  Jesus  received  a  second 
consolation,  made  necessary  by  the  failure  of  the  disciples 
to  comprehend  the  law  of  the  cross.  He  obtained  the 
assurance  that  by  willingness  to  become  a  sacrifice  He 
gained  the  approval  of  His  heavenly  Father,  With  this 
faith  He  went  cheerfully  on  His  way  with  His  face 
stedfastly  set  towards  Jerusalem,  finding  in  the  certainty 
of  death  the  most  convincing  evidence  that  He  was 
indeed  the  Lord's  Anointed.  Henceforth  unwavering 
confidence  might  go  hand  in  hand  with  deepest  lowliness. 
I  said  that  no  explanation  of  the  Christ-consciousness  of 
Jesus  could  be  accepted  which  did  not  respect  His 
humility.  For  this  reason  I  hesitated  to  regard  the 
sense  of  sinlessness  as  the  origin  of  that  consciousness, 
and  preferred  to  find  it  in  the  Messianic  charism  of  love. 
Impelled  by  love,  Jesus  could  wear  His  honour  meekly. 
Still  more  effectually  was  His  meekness  guarded  when 
the  Messianic  vocation  was  associated  with  the  spirit  of 
self-sacrifice.      Then    Messiahship   appeared    not  as   an 


EELATION  OF  JESUS  TO  MESSIANIC  HOPES..  165 

honour,  but  as  a  service,  and  as  a  service  involving 
humiliation  and  pain.  "No  man  taketh  this  honour 
unto  himself,"  writes  the  author  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  with  reference  to  the  priestly  office.  Ambition 
might  seize  the  position  when  priest  and  sacrificial  victim 
were  distinct,  as  under  the  Levitical  system ;  but  there 
was  no  fear  of  that  happening  when,  as  in  the  case  of 
Jesus,  priest  and  victim  became  one.  Then  the  wearer 
of  the  sacerdotal  robes,  instead  of  proudly  arrogating 
office,  rather  humbly  submitted  to  be  made  a  priest. 
Even  so  was  it  with  the  vocation  of  Messiah.  The 
dignities  of  a  Messiahship  honoured  by  the  world's 
homage  vanity  might  covet,  but  the  office  of  a  suffering 
Messiah  no  one  would  undertake  unless  his  motto  were, 
"  Not  My  will,  but  Thine  be  done." 


CHAPTEE  VII. 

THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD. 

Both  these  titles  were  applied  by  Jesus  to  Himself,  the 
former  the  more  frequently,  and  by  preference ;  the 
latter,  though  seldom  so  far  as  the  synoptical  record  is 
concerned,  on  important  occasions  which  invest  its  use 
with  deep  significance.  Both  sprang  out  of  His  Messianic 
consciousness,  and  gave  expression  to  it  under  different 
aspects.  Both  marked  Him  out  as  in  some  sense  an 
exceptional  man,  and  tended  naturally  to  provoke  the 
inquiry.  Who  is  this  who  designates  Himself  in  this 
unwonted  fashion  ? 

With  reference  to  the  former  of  the  two  titles,  the  Son 
of  Man,  the  question  has  been  asked.  Was  it  current  as  a 
Messianic  name  among  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's  time? 
This  question  is  not  foreclosed  by  the  statement  that  the 
name  had  Messianic  significance  for  Jesus  Himself.  It 
might  have  a  private  meaning  for  Him  which  it  did  not 
bear  to  the  public ;  it  might  even  conceivably  have  been 
employed  to  serve  the  purpose  of  an  incognito.  On  the 
other  hand,  there  is  no  antecedent  improbability  in  the 
supposition  that  tlie  name  had  gained  currency  in  the 
popular  religious  dialect,  as  a  Messianic  title,  through 
the  influence  of  the  book  of  Daniel.     That  it  had  actu- 

1G6 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  167 

ally  obtained  this  position  might  even  be  regarded  as  a 
probable  inference  from  the  use  made  of  it  in  the 
apocryphal  book  of  Enoch,  assuming — what,  however,  is 
much  disputed — that  the  date  of  that  writing,  or  of  the 
whole  of  it,  is  earlier  than  the  Christian  era/  But  that 
it  had  not  in  fact  become  fully  naturalized  as  a  title  of 
the  Messiah  in  the  time  of  our  Lord  appears  from  two 
circumstances.  One  is  that  He  employed  it  freely, 
while  practising  reserve  in  regard  to  His  claims  to  be 
the  Christ.  The  other  is  the  peculiar  form  in  which 
Matthew  gives  the  question  addressed  by  Jesus  to  his 
disciples  at  Caesarea  Philippi :  "  Whom  do  men  say  that 
I,  the  Son  of  Man,  am  ? "  ^  Even  if  the  original  form  of 
the  question  were  that  given  in  Mark,  "  Whom  do  men 
say  that  I  am  ? "  ^  the  insertion  of  the  explanatory  clause 

1  There  is  little  doubt  that  a  part  of  the  book  is  of  pre-Christian 
origin.  The  uncertainty  as  to  date  concerns  chapters  37-71,  called 
the  book  of  Parables  or  Similitudes,  in  which  the  title  "Son  of 
Man  "  is  of  frequent  occurrence,  and  which  is  generally  regarded  as 
of  later  date  than  the  rest  of  the  book.  Scholars  are  much  divided 
in  opinion  as  to  whether  this  portion  of  the  book  of  Enoch  came 
into  existence  before  or  after  the  Christian  era.  Drummond,  in  his 
work  on  The  Jeivish  Messiah,  thus  expresses  his  oxjinion  :  "  I  fear  we 
must  rest  in  the  conclusion  that  we  cannot  rely  upon  the  integrity 
of  the  present  book  of  Enoch  ;  that  the  Messianic  passages  in  the 
Similitudes  are  of  unknown  but  probably  Christian  origin  ;  that 
therefore  we  cannot  safely  appeal  to  them  as  evidence  of  pre- 
Christian  Jewish  belief."  In  a  note  he  states  :  "  This  conclusion  is 
accepted,  in  addition  to  Hilgenfeld,  by  Holtzmann,  Keim,  Oehler, 
Volkmar,  Kuenen,  Tideman,  Colani.  On  the  other  side  are  Anger, 
Schenkel,  Schlirer."  Among  the  most  recent  writers  the  same 
diversity  of  opinion  prevails.  Baldensperger  claims  a  pre-Christian 
date  (the  Herodian  period)  for  the  Similitudes.  On  the  other  hand, 
Stanton  {The  Jeivish  and  the  Christian  Messiah,  1886)  believes  them 
to  be  post-Christian. 

2  Matt.  xvi.  13.  ^  Mark  viii.  27. 


168  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

by  the  first  evangelist  is  significant,  as  showing  that  at 
the  time  when  his  Gospel  was  written  the  name  "  Son  of 
Man "  was  not  regarded  as  a  synonym  for  Christ.  In 
that  case  the  proper  form  of  the  question  had  been : 
Whom  do  men  say  that  I  am  ?  do  they  take  me  for  the 
Son  of  Man  ? 

To  whatever  extent  the  book  of  Enoch  may  have 
influenced  contemporary  opinion,  it  may  be  taken  for 
granted  that  Jesus  did  not  simply  adopt  traditional 
notions  of  Jewish  theology  respecting  the  Son  of  Man. 
He  borrowed  from  the  past  as  Shakespeare  borrowed, 
transmuting  traditional  data  into  a  new  conception 
bearing  the  stamp  of  his  own  genius.  An  apocalyptic 
element  is  indeed  traceable  in  His  use  of  the  designation 
now  under  consideration.  But  in  how  purified  a  form 
does  that  element  appear !  What  simple  dignity  charac- 
terizes the  solemn  declaration  made  before  the  Sanhedrim  : 
"  Hereafter  shall  ye  see  the  Son  of  Man  sitting  on  the 
right  hand  of  power,  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of 
heaven  "  !  ^  Such  an  utterance  stands  in  the  same  rela- 
tion to  corresponding  passages  in  the  book  of  Enoch,  that 
the  cosmogony  of  the  book  of  Genesis  bears  to  the 
Chaldsean  myths  regarding  the  creation.  But,  in  truth, 
it  is  very  questionable  if  the  words  of  Jesus  have  any 
connection  whatever  with  that  apocryphal  book,  and  are 
not  rather  to  be  directly  affiliated  to  the  oracle  concern- 
ing the  Son  of  Man  in  the  book  of  Daniel,  whereof  the 
relative  parts  of  the  book  named  after  the  ancient 
patriarch  are  a  coarse  sensuous  expansion.  It  has  even 
been  disputed  whether  Christ's  use  of  the  title  had  any 
i  Matt.  xxvi.  64. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  169 

conscious  reference  to  that  oracle,  and  is  not  rather  to 
be  accounted  for  by  some  other  Old  Testament  texts 
in  which  it  occurs.  Schleiermacher,  e.g.,  reckoned  the 
derivation  of  the  title  from  Daniel  as  an  odd  fancy, 
remarking  in  proof  of  its  untenableness  that  the  prophet 
does  not  call  the  Messianic  King  the  Son  of  Man,  but 
simply  represents  Him  as  manlihc,  in  contrast  to  the 
kings  of  the  other  kingdoms  previously  mentioned,  of 
whom  beasts  were  the  appropriate  emblems.'^  The  words 
spoken  by  Jesus  at  His  trial,  however,  correspond  so 
closely  with  those  of  the  prophet  as  to  make  it  almost 
certain  that  He  had  the  latter  in  His  mind,  and  an  echo 
of  them  may  be  recognised  in  other  sayings  recorded  by 
the  evangelists,  in  which  the  same  apocalyptic  colouring 
appears.^  And  we  can  easily  imagine  how  Daniel's 
prophecy  might  have  its  attractions  for  the  mind  of 
Jesus.  Specially  congenial  to  His  spirit,  doubtless,  was 
the  description  of  the  Messianic  kingdom  as  one  in  which 
humanity  was  to  replace  the  ferocity  characteristic  of 
the  great  monarchies  symbolized  by  the  winged  lion,  the 
bear,  the  leopard,  and  the  beast  with  ten  horns.  It  was 
such  a  kingdom,  wherein  wisdom  and  love  bore  sway, 
whose  advent  He  proclaimed,  and  of  which  He  claimed 
to  be  King.  In  adopting  the  style  and  title  of  "  the 
Son  of  Man,"  as  the  Euler  of  that  kingdom,  it  was  not 
alone  the  halo  of  apocalyptic  glory  that  He  had  in  view ; 
it  probably  lay  nearer  His  heart  to  accentuate  His  human 
sympathies. 

Another  possible  source  of  the  title  is  the  saying  in 
the  Psalter:  "What  is  man  that  Thou  art  mindful  of    ^ 
1  Christliche  Glaube,  ii.  91.  ^  Matt.  xvi.  27,  xix.  28,  xxv.  31. 


170  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

him,  or  the  son  of  man  that  Thou  visitest  him  ? "  ^  It 
expresses  the  humility  of  the  Psalmist  by  contrasting 
God's  favour  to  man  with  man's  intrinsic  insignificance. 
It  also  expresses  his  sense  of  the  dignity  of  man  as  by 
the  grace  of  God  placed  at  the  head  of  creation,  and 
crowned  with  glory  and  honour.  If  Jesus  borrowed  the 
designation  from  the  psalm,  we  might  expect  to  find  in 
His  use  of  it  both  of  these  sentiments  reflected.  Keim, 
accordingly,  who  adopts  this  view,  ascribes  to  the  name 
the  twofold  sense — the  humble  poor  man,  and  the  man 
who  in  lowliness  is  highly  exalted ;  to  which  he  adds  a 
third  meaning,  due  to  the  passage  being  transformed  from 
a  statement  about  mankind  into  a  Messianic  text — the 
man  organically  united  to  humanity.^  As  used  by  the 
prophet  Ezekiel,  the  title  seems  to  bear  a  meaning  kindred 
to  that  of  the  Psalmist.  It  expresses  the  humility  of 
one  who,  notwithstanding  his  intimate  relation  to  God, 
was  ever  mindful  of  his  human  weakness.  But  from  the 
simple  circumstance  of  being  applied  to  a  prophet,  it 
might  become  in  course  of  time  a  name  of  dignity,  denoting 
the  prophetic  vocation,  and  asserting  a  claim  to  exercise 
the  highest  prophetic  functions.  Accordingly  it  has  been 
maintained  that  the  title  was  actually  so  used  by  Jesus, 
and  that  some  of  the  most  characteristic  instances  of  its 
use  in  the  Gospels,  are  cases  in  which  it  is  associated 
with  the  exercise  of  the  higher  prophetic  rights,  such  as 
the  forgiving  of  sin,  in  connection  with  the  healing  of 
the  paralytic,  and  the  claim  of  lordship  over  the  Sabbath. 
This  usage,  it  is  held,  was  intended  as  an  education  of 
the  disciples  for  ultimately  recognising  in  their  Master 
^  Ps.  viii.  4.  ,  ^  Jesu  von  Nazara,  ii.  75. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.     17 1 

something  more  than  a  prophet  like  Ezekiel,  even  the 
Messiah.^ 

Yet  another  theory  as  to  the  Old  Testament  origin  of  , 
the  title  has  been  advocated,  which  for  the  sake  of  com- 
pleteness may  here  be  referred  to.  It  finds  the  source 
in  the  Protevangelium,  in  which  it  was  promised  that  the 
seed  of  the  woman  should  crush  the  head  of  the  serpent, 
and  which  led  Eve  on  the  birth  of  her  first-born  son  to 
exclaim,  "  I  have  gotten  a  man  from  the  Lord ! "  On 
this  view,  Jesus,  by  calling  Himself  Son  of  Man,  claimed 
to  be  the  promised  seed  of  the  woman,  the  man  from  the 
Lord,  the  Son  of  Adam  by  whom  the  race  of  Adam  was 
to  be  redeemed,  the  title  being  thus  made  to  have  refer- 
ence not  merely  to  the  person,  but  more  particularly  to 
the  work  of  Christ.  The  Son  of  Man  is  thus  "  the  man 
to  whom  the  whole  history  of  humanity  points  as  its  end, 
and  in  whom  the  hope  of  humanity  is  fulfilled."  ^ 

None  of  these  views  can  be  regarded  as  established,  or 
at  least  as  exclusively  true,  and  in  the  midst  of  uncer- 
tainty we  must  turn  to  the  actual  use  of  the  title  as  ^ 
recorded  in  the  Gospels,  as  our  best  guide  to  its  meaning. 
And  in  doing  so  I  am  inclined  to  dismiss  at  once,  as 
improbable,  any  explanation  which  gives  to  Christ's 
favourite  self-designation  a  prosaic  or  dogmatic  character. 
I  assume  that  in  this  as  in  all  His  utterances,  He  was 
like  Himself,  and  spake  not  as  a  rabbi,  or  a  theological 
doctor,  but  as  a  prophet  and  poet  whose  words  came 
from  the  heart  charged  with  emotion.  This  principle 
excludes  almost  without  examination  several  theories  as 

^  Weizsacker,  TJntersuchungen.,  S.  430. 
2  Hofmann,  Schriftheireis,  i.  54. 


172  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

to  the  significance  of  the  title,  such  as  that  of  Hofmann 
above  explained,  or  that  which  interprets  it  to  mean  the 
ideal  man,  or  that  which  finds  in  it  a  hint  of  Christ's 
di\dnity,  and  would  paraphrase  it :  the  man  who  is  more 
than  man,  and  who  therefore  needs  to  say  that  He  is 
man  ;  and  even  that  of  Weizsacker,  according  to  which 
it  is  to  be  interpreted :  the  man  who  is  a  great  prophet, 
and  possibly  something  still  higher.  These  theories  are 
very  ingenious,  but  they  are  too  far-fetched  to  commend 
themselves  to  approval.  A  sense  which  is  simple,  spon- 
taneous, and  natural  is  much  to  be  preferred. 

The  texts  in  which  the  title  occurs  admit  of  being 
gathered  into  groups.  There  is  a  large  group,  which 
readily  suggests  the  thought  that  the  "  Son  of  Man " 
means  for  one  thing  the  man  of  sorrow  and  acquainted 
with  grief.  The  typical  text  of  this  class  is  that  con- 
taining the  saying :  "  The  foxes  have  holes,  and  the  birds 
of  the  air  have  nests,  but  the  Son  of  Man  hath  not 
where  to  lay  His  head,"  ^  which  declares  the  Speaker  to 
be  emphatically  an  unprivileged  man,  whatever  would-be 
disciples  might  imagine.  To  the  same  class  belongs  the 
saying :  "  Whosoever  speaketh  a  word  against  the  Son  of 
p-~-JMan,  it  shall  be  forgiven  him."  ^  This  does  not  mean 
that  the  blasphemer  of  the  Son  of  Man  shall  with  diffi- 
culty be  forgiven,  as  if  the  design  were  to  indicate  the 
limit  of  forgiveness.  It  signifies  rather  that  this  kind  of 
blasphemy  is  of  course  pardonable,  as  being  only  an 
instance  of  a  common  offence  committed  by  men  against 
each  other  through  misunderstanding  of  each  other's 
characters  and  motives.  The  Son  of  Man  is  not  exempt 
1  Matt.  viii.  20.  2  ^att.  xii.  32. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  173 

from  the  common  lot ;  He  is  liable  to  be  misunderstood 
and  maligned  like  other  men,  and  He  accepts  that  as  part 
of  His  experience.  Blasphemy  against  the  Holy  Ghost 
is  another  matter  altogether.  It  is  to  speak  against 
Christ,  or  against  any  other  servant  of  God,  not  under 
misapprehension,  but  knowing  full  well  that  they  are  the 
agents  of  the  Divine  Spirit.  To  this  group  also  belong 
the  texts  in  which  the  coming  sufferings  of  the  Son  of 
Man  are  predicted,  such  as  these :  "  As  Jonas  was  three 
days  and  three  nights  in  the  whale's  belly,  so  shall  also 
the  Son  of  Man  be  three  days  and  three  nights  in  the 
heart  of  the  earth ; "  "  Elias  is  come  already,  and  they 
knew  him  not,  but  have  done  unto  him  whatsoever  they 
listed.  Likewise  shall  also  the  Son  of  Man  suffer  of 
them  ; "  "  The  Son  of  Man  shall  be  betrayed  into  the 
hands  of  men."  ^ 

As  this  first  group  of  texts  proclaims  the  Son  of  Man 
to  be  the  unprivileged  Man,  so  a  second  group  signalizes 
Him  as  the  syinjpathetic  Man.  Of  this  class  we  may  take 
as  the  type :  "  The  Son  of  Man  came  eating  and  drink- 
ing," ^  in  which  the  reference  is  to  the  social  sympathetic 
relations  into  which  Jesus  entered  with  the  outcasts  with 
a  view  to  their  spiritual  benefit ;  with  which  may  be 
associated,  "  The  Son  of  Man  came  to  seek  and  save  the 
lost,"^  which  states  the  philanthropic  aim  of  Christ's 
mission,  as  the  other  states  its  method.  Under  this  head 
also  may  be  included,  most  legitimately,  the  two  remark- 
able sayings  in  which  Jesus  claimed  for  the  Son  of  Man 
power   to  forgive  sins,  and  lordship   over  the  Sabbath.'^ 

1  Matt.  xii.  40,  xvii.  12,  23.  ^  Matt.  xi.  19. 

8  Luke  xix.  10.  *  Matt.  ix.  6,  xii.  8. 


174  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

The  key  to  the  meaning  in  both  cases  is  the  deep  human 
sympathy  of  Jesus,  in  virtue  of  which  He  can  declare 
with   effect   the   divine  forgiving   love,  and  is  the  best 
interpreter  of  the  Sabbath  law,  and  the  best  judge  as  to 
the  wisest  mode  of  observing  it.      The  claim  advanced  is 
in   both  cases  directed  against  Pharisaic  notions.     The 
Pharisees  viewed  God's  relation  to  sin  from  the  side  of 
His  majesty ;  Jesus,  on  the  contrary,  viewed  it  from  the 
side  of  His  grace.     God,  He  says  to  His  critics,  is  not 
such  as  ye  imagine — severe,  slow  to  forgive,  and  jealous 
of  His  prerogative ;  He  is  good,  and  ready  to  forgive,  and 
has   no   desire  to  monopolize  the  privilege  of  forgiving. 
He  is  willing  that  it  should  be  exercised  by  all  on  earth 
in  whom  dwells  His  own  spirit ;  and  My  right  to  forgive 
rests  on  this,  that  I  am  a  sympathetic  friend  of  the  sinful, 
full  of  the  grace  and  charity  of  heaven.    The  Pharisaic  view 
of  the  Sabbath  was  kindred  to  their  view  of  forgiveness. 
They  regarded   the  institution  not  as  a  divine  gift  for 
man's  benefit,  but  as  a  divine  exaction  ;  and  hence  they 
hedged  the  weekly  rest  about  with   innumerable  vexa- 
tious restrictions.     Jesus  regarded  the  institution  from  a 
philanthropic  point  of  view,  and   He   claimed  lordship 
over  it  for  the  Son  of  Man  on  the  ground  of  His  sympathy 
with  mankind,  which  He  deemed  a  far    more    reliable 
interpreter  of  the  divine  purpose  and  guide  in  observance, 
than  the  merciless  rigour  of  the  rabbis. 
I      In  a  third  group  of  texts  the  apocalyptic  element  is 
'more  or  less  prominent.      In  all  these  there  are  allusions 
to  a  future  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man,  and  in  some  to 
the    accompanying    circumstances    of    the    coming :    the 
appearance    in    the   clouds,  the   throne,   the    glory,   the 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  175 

escort  of  angels.  In  a  number  of  the  texts  there  is  an 
implied  contrast  between  a  present  full  of  trial  and  the 
future  glory  which  lends  pathos  to  the  words  recorded, 
making  the  bright  hope  of  the  Son  of  Man  appear  as 
His  consolation  amid  the  sorrowful  experiences  of  earth. 
Thus,  when  Jesus  told  His  disciples  at  Csesarea  that  the 
Son  of  Man  should  come  in  the  glory  of  His  Father 
with  His  angels,  to  reward  every  man  according  to  his 
works,  it  was  in  immediate  connection  with  an  announce- 
ment of  His  approaching  passion.^  When  at  Peroea  He 
promised  to  His  faithful  companions,  in  the  regeneration, 
thrones  beside  the  Son  of  Man,  the  promise  was  made  by 
one  who  knew  that  He  should  soon  have  to  lay  down 
His  life  for  the  kingdom,  to  men  who  had  left  all  that 
they  might  follow  Him.^  The  solemn  declaration  before 
the  high  priest  concerning  the  session  on  the  right  hand 
of  power,  was  made  by  one  who  at  the  moment  was  a 
prisoner  at  the  bar  on  His  trial,  and  it  meant :  "  Ere 
long  you  and  I  shall  change  places."^ 

In  one  remarkable  instance,  the  parabolic  representa- 
tion of  the  judgment,  there  is  not  merely  an  implied 
contrast,  but  an  express  blending  of  the  future  glory 
with  present  humiliation.  He  who  shall  come  in  His 
glory  accompanied  by  all  the  holy  angels,  and  take 
possession  of  His  judicial  throne  before  an  assembled 
world,  is  one  who  can  say :  I  have  been  an  hungered, 
thirsty,  a  stranger,  naked,  sick,  a  prisoner.  The  fact  of 
His  having  such  a  history  throws  a  deep  pathos  into  the 
judgment  programme,  and  divests  it  of  every  semblance 
of  vainglory  or  arrogant  pretension.    No  one  grudges  this 

1  Matt.  xvi.  27.         -  Matt.  xix.  28,  cf.  27.         »  Matt.  xxvi.  64. 


176  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Man  of  Sorrow  His  judicial  honours  ;  He  has  fully  earned 
His  throne,  and  His  competency  for  the  task  is  beyond 
question.  His  verdict  will  be  according  to  truth  if  the 
treatment  given  to  the  natural  objects  of  pity  is  to  be 
the  supreme  test  of  character,  for  He  has  become  an 
expert  in  applying  the  test.  And  that  this  is  to  be  the 
principle  of  judgment  is  solemnly  announced :  "  Inas- 
much as  ye  did  it  unto  one  of  these  least  ones,  my 
brethren,  ye  did  it  unto  Me."  ^  The  Judge  regards  the 
children  of  sorrow  everywhere  as  His  vicars,  and  takes 
what  is  done  to  them  as  done  to  Himself.  In  this  part 
of  the  parable  the  human  sympathy  of  the  Son  of  Man 
becomes  conspicuous,  so  that  in  the  delineation  as  a 
whole  all  the  attributes  denoted  by  the  title,  majesty, 
humility,  love,  are  united,  presenting  together  an  im- 
posing picture.  By  this  feature,  moreover,  Christianity  is 
adapted  to  be  the  basis  of  equitable  judgment  of  all  men 
irrespective  of  time  and  place.  Men  can  be  approved  or 
condemned  for  their  attitude  towards  Christ  who  have 
never  heard  His  name.  The  essence  of  Christianity  is 
placed  in  love,  and  love  is  made  the  touchstone  of 
character  and  the  arbiter  of  destiny.  A  loftier  ideal  of 
judge  and  judgment  it  is  not  possible  to  conceive. 
r  It  thus  appears  that  the  title  "  Son  of  Man  "  expressed 
the  Messianic  consciousness  of  Jesus  in  three  distinct 
directions.  It  announced  a  Messiah  appointed  to  suffer, 
richly  endowed  with  human  sympathy,  and  destined  to 
pass  through  suffering  to  glory.  In  all  three  respects 
it  pointed  at  a  Messianic  ideal  contrary  to  popular 
notions.  For  that  very  reason  Jesus  loved  the  name,  as 
^  Matt.  XXV.  40. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.     177 

expressing  truth  valid  for  Himself,  as  fitted  to  foster  just 
conceptions  in.  receptive  minds,  and  as  steering  clear  of 
current  misapprehensions.  With  reference  to  these  it 
served  the  purpose  of  an  incognito,  making  it  possible 
for  Jesus  to  declare  Himself  to  be  the  Christ  to  those 
who  were  in  the  secret,  and  yet  remain  an  unknown 
stranger  to  the  outside  world.  In  adopting  the  name 
"  Son  of  Man,"  Jesus  as  it  were  spoke  in  parables,  \ 
teaching  much  to  prepared  hearers,  little  to  the  unpre-^ 
pared.  The  twelve,  to  whom  it  was  given  to  know  the 
mysteries  of  the  kingdom,  penetrated  gradually  into  the 
hidden  import  of  the  pathetic  mystic  name,  inductively 
gathering  impressions  from  its  daily  use.  But  the 
incidents  at  Caesarea  show  that  even  then  they  had  not 
divined  all  its  meaning.  Peter  declared  ex  animo  his 
belief  that  his  Master  was  the  Christ ;  but  that  his 
Messianic  creed  had  not  yet  undergone  complete  trans- 
formation, appeared  from  his  vehement  resistance  to  the 
announcement  of  the  coming  passion.  He  now  fully 
understood  that  the  Son  of  Man  was  the  Christ,  but  he 
did  not  yet  understand  that  the  Christ  was  the  Son  of 
Man.  He  had  probably  mastered  some  of  the  lessons 
the  title  was  fitted  to  teach,  but  he  had  failed  as  yet  to 
master  the  most  abstruse,  and  the  most  remote  from 
prevalent  notions,  the  idea  of  a  suffering  Messiah.  That 
thought  was  not  to  be  communicated  by  mere  names,  or 
even  by  the  plainest  pre-intimations ;  the  event  alone 
could  open  the  eyes  of  the  disciples.  Minor  incidents  in 
the  Master's  curriculum  of  trial,  such  as  already  lay 
behind  them,  they  could  easily  reconcile  themselves  to, 
but  death  by  violence  to  the  last  must  remain  incredible, 

M  ' 


178  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

j  The  title  Son  of  God  expressed  the  Messianic  con- 
sciousness of  Jesus  God-wards.  It  might  conceivably 
have  been  used  by  Him  in  four  distinct  senses :  as  ex- 
pressing a  relation  to  God  common  to  Him  with  other 
men,  and  based  on  the  simple  fact  of  being  a  man ;  as  a 
Messianic  title  of  dignity ;  as  denoting  moral  likeness  to 
and  intimate  fellowship  with  God ;  and  as  implying  pos- 
session of  the  divine  nature.  The  four  senses  may  be  dis- 
criminated as  the  human,  the  official,  the  ethical,  and  the 
metaphysical.  Of  the  first  sense  no  example  can  be  cited. 
We  do  not  anywhere  find  Jesus  calling  Himself  Son  of 
God  merely  in  virtue  of  His  being  a  son  of  man.  Neither 
do  we  find  Him  referring  to  God  in  terms  suggestive  of 
a  relation  to  Him  common  to  Himself  with  others,  using 
e.g.  the  expression  "  our  Father  in  heaven  "  in  addressing 
an  audience  as  a  modern  preacher  might,  or  as  the 
prophet  Malachi  did  when  he  asked  his  countrymen 
guilty  of  a  WTong  against  their  brethren,  "  Have  we  not 
all  one  father  ? "  ^  He  said  "  My  Father  "  and  "  your 
Father."  Only  once  does  the  expression  "  our  Father  " 
occur,  viz.  in  the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  it  is  far  from  certain 
that  Jesus  meant  to  include  Himself  in  the  "  our,"  albeit 
the  prayer  was  given  for  the  use  of  His  own  disciples  ; 
though  the  supposition  is  not  in  itself  inadmissible, 
sonship  in  a  most  real  sense  being  common  to  Him  with 
them. 

Three  instances  of  the  official  sense  occur.     The  first 

is  in  the  confession  of  Peter  as  given  in  the  first  Gospel : 

"  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God."     There 

is  room   for  doubt  which  of  the  two  forms  of  the  con- 

1  Mai.  ii.  20. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  l79 

fession,  that  of  Matthew  or  the  shorter  one  given  by 
Mark,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ,"  ^  is  the  original.  In  the 
latter  case  we  should  merely  have  in  the  words  an  instance 
of  the  use  of  the  name  as  a  Messianic  title  of  honour  by 
the  evangelist,  or  by  the  Apostolic  Church  whose  faith 
is  reflected  in  his  narrative ;  in  the  former  we  should  be 
entitled  to  cite  the  passage  as  an  instance  of  its  use  in 
that  sense  by  Jesus  Himself,  seeing  He  emphatically 
approved  the  solemn  declaration  made  by  His  disciple. 
The  second  instance  occurs  in  the  parable  of  the  wicked 
vinedressers,  in  which,  under  "  the  son  "  whom  they  slew, 
Jesus  doubtless  made  a  veiled  allusion  to  Himself  as  the 
Messianic  Son  of  the  Most  High.^  The  third  occurs  in 
the  question  put  by  the  high  priest  to  Jesus  before  the 
Sanhedrim :  "  I  adjure  Thee  by  the  living  God,  that 
Thou  tell  us  whether  Thou  be  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God."  ^  The  affirmative  reply  of  Jesus  homologated  the 
double  title  as  applicable  to  Himself.  As  understood  by 
both  parties,  the  second  name  was  a  synonym  for  the 
first.  The  Christ  was  regarded  as  ex  officio  Son  of  God. 
In  all  three  cases  the  obvious  Old  Testament  basis  of  the 
title  is  to  be  found  in  the  two  texts :  "  Thou  art  my  Son, 
this  day  have  I  begotten  Thee ;  "  ^  "I  will  be  His  Father, 
and  He  shall  be  my  Son."  ^ 

Of  the  use  of  the  title  in  the  ethical  sense  we  have  a 
peculiarly  instructive  example  in  the  saying,  "  Xo  man 
knoweth  the  Son,  but  the  Father ;  neither  knoweth  any 
man  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the 
Son   is  pleased   to   reveal   Him."^      This  notable   word 

I  Mark  viii.  29.  2  Matt.  xxi.  37.  ^  Matt.  xxvi.  63. 

4  Ps.  ii.  7.  ^  2  Sam.  vii.  14.  «  Matt.  xi.  27. 


180  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

points  to  a  very  intimate  fellowship  based  on  moral 
affinity.  The  text  as  used  by  Gnostics  ran,  "  No  man 
knew  the  Father  save  the  Son,  and  no  man  knoweth  the 
Son  save  the  Father,"  and  in  this  form  amounted  to 
little  more  than  a  claim  advanced  by  Jesus  to  be  the 
historical  revealer  of  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  the  religious 
teacher  who  first  gave  prominence  to  that  aspect  of  the 
divine  character.  But  the  text  as  it  stands  in  our 
Gospels,  which  we  have  every  reason  to  regard  as  the 
authentic  form  of  the  saying,  points  to  something  deeper, 
even  to  intimate  personal  relations  between  Father  and 
Son.  The  word  flowed  out  of  the  hidden  fountain  of  the 
Son's  heart.  Through  it,  as  through  all  kindred  sayings, 
the  Messianic  consciousness  of  Jesus  found  utterance. 
This  is  not  to  be  understood,  however,  in  the  sense  that 
Jesus  inferred  His  Sonship  from  His  Messiahship,  and 
called  Himself  Son  of  God  because  He  believed  Himself 
to  be  the  Christ.  On  the  contrary,  the  filial  conscious- 
ness was  the  source  of  the  Messianic.  The  love  Jesus 
bore  to  His  Father,  and  the  love  He  bore  to  men, 
together  gave  birth  to  faith  in  His  Messianic  vocation, 
even  as  they  also  aided  Him  to  hold  fast  that  faith 
through  all  the  trials  of  His  public  life. 

The  filial  consciousness  of  Christ  blossomed  into  rich 
and  varied  expression  at  the  time  when  the  memorable 
word  above  quoted  w^as  spoken,  supplying  materials  from 
which  we  can  learn  the  outstanding  characteristics  of  the 
spirit  of  sonship.  The  sayings  recorded  by  the  evangelist 
reveal  a  spirit  of  loyal  devotion  and  humble  submission 
to  the  Father's  will,  of  unlimited  confidence  in  the 
Father's   love,   of    intimate   fellowship   with  the   Father 


THE  SOX  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  181 

fruitful  in  peace  and  joy,  and  of  liberty  and  self-reliant 
independence  in  reference  to  the  world.  The  first  of 
these  four  qualities  found  expression  in  the  words :  "  I 
thank  Thee,  0  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  because 
Thou  hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  under- 
standing, and  hast  revealed  them  unto  babes."  ^  There 
were  both  resignation  and  thanksgiving  in  the  utterance 
— resignation  in  view  of  the  unbelief  of  the  wise,  thank- 
fulness for  the  faith  of  the  babes.  Both  were  possible 
only  through  single-hearted,  self-effacing  devotion  to  the 
service  of  the  Father  in  the  work  of  the  kincjdom.  Jesus 
could  leave  the  results  of  His  ministry  in  His  Father's 
hands,  content  that  they  should  be  great  or  small  as 
Providence  appointed,  because  in  all  His  efforts  He 
sought  not  His  own  glory,  but  the  glory  of  Him  who 
sent  Him.  His  intense  interest  in  the  progress  of  the 
kingdom  might  tempt  Him  to  regret  that  so  few  received 
His  message,  but  the  disciplined  spirit  of  filial  devotion 
replied :  "  It  is  my  part  to  labour  with  all  my  soul  and 
strength ;  it  is  my  Father's  to  determine  the  issue.  Far 
from  me  be  the  thought  of  shaping  my  conduct  so  as  to 
ensure  popularity.  Let  me  be  faithful  to  truth,  and 
satisfied  with  such  disciples  as  I  can  get  on  these  terms." 
Christ's  filial  trust  found  emphatic  expression  in  the 
words  :  "  All  things  are  delivered  unto  me  of  my  Father."^ 
This  was  a  remarkable  statement  in  the  circumstances. 
For  one  who  found  Himself  distrusted  or  repelled  by  the 
great  mass  of  his  fellow-countrymen,  and  especially  by 
such  as  possessed  social  influence,  and  believed  in  only 
by  a  small  band  of  insignificant  persons,  to  say,  "All 
1  Matt.  xi.  25.  2  Matt.  xi.  27. 


182  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

things  are  delivered  unto  me,"  was  surely  to  walk  by 
faith.  To  the  eye  of  sense,  that  little  band  of  disciples 
was  a  niggard  gift.  The  world  in  its  heartless  way 
would  call  it  ignominious  failure.  From  that  company 
to  "  all  things,"  what  a  leap !  It  was  a  leap  possible 
only  to  a  faith  which  was  the  evidence  of  things  not 
seen,  to  a  confidence  in  a  Father's  goodwill  and  purpose 
so  absolute  as  to  be  unassailable  by  adverse  circum- 
stances, and  able  to  say  :  "  The  future,  the  world,  universal 
lordship  are  mine,  though  this  motley  group  are  all  that 
can  be  seen  of  my  inheritance." 

It  was  out  of  the  blissful  consciousness  of  a  serene 
joyful  fellowship  with  His  Father  that  Jesus  uttered  the 
third  filial  word  recorded  by  the  evangelist :  "  No  man 
knoweth  the  Son  but  the  Father,  neither  knoweth  any 
man  the  Father  save  the  Son."  The  reciprocal  know- 
ledge alluded  to  is  not  of  the  theoretic  sort,  but  such  as 
springs  out  of  a  loving,  confiding  intimacy.  It  is  the 
good  understanding  that  subsists  between  bosom  friends 
in  full  accord  in  sentiments,  sympathies,  and  aims.  The 
Gospel  history  supplies  numerous  illustrations  and  evi- 
dences of  such  an  understanding  between  Jesus  and  His 
heavenly  Father ;  as  in  the  narratives  of  the  Baptism, 
the  Transfiguration,  the  choice  of  the  Twelve,  and  the 
preaching  of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  At  critical 
times  it  was  the  habit  of  Jesus  to  spend  hours  in 
devotional  converse  with  Heaven,  meditating  over  and 
speaking  about  His  plans  in  presence  of  His  Father. 
After  such  seasons  of  solitary  communion  with  God,  He 
went  forth  to  action  or  suffering  with  cheerful  resolute 
step,  assured  that  He   was  about  to  do  or  endure  what 


THE  SON  OF  MAX,  AND  THE  SOX  OF  GOD.  183 

was  well-pleasing  in  God's  sight.  In  such  comrannion 
He  experienced  a  peace  and  gladness  which  were  but 
accentuated  by  adverse  circumstances.  Misunderstood 
by  men,  much  even  by  friends,  totally  and  fatally  by 
foes,  it  was  an  abundant  consolation  that  He  was  per- 
fectly understood  by  His  Father.  Left  absolutely  alone 
at  the  last.  He  did  not  feel  lonely,  because  the  Father 
was  with  Him.  His  lot  was  hard  ;  poverty,  social  con- 
tempt, and  other  ills  of  life  pressed  heavily  on  Him ;  yet 
amid  all  His  spirit  was  irrepressibly  buoyant  and  gay. 
The  Lord  God  was  His  joy  and  strength :  communion 
with  Him  made  His  feet  like  the  feet  of  the  hind  of  the 
dawn,  and  He  could  walk,  yea  leap,  securely  on  the 
rocky  Alpine  heights. 

The  same  words  in  which  Jesus  revealed  the  deep 
tranquillity  of  His  heart  in  fellowship  with  God,  also 
gave  forcible  expression  to  the  free,  self-reliant  spirit 
which  animated  Him  in  His  whole  bearing  towards  the 
world.  In  this  aspect  they  meant :  "  My  Father  knows 
Me,  and  I  can  dispense  with  the  recognition  of  the  wise 
and  learned.  I  can  do  without  them,  though  they  can- 
not do  without  Me ;  for  no  man  knoweth  the  Father 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  is  pleased 
to  reveal  Him."  This  independent  attitude  was  a  true 
victory  of  faith  for  the  Son  of  Man  in  His  state  of 
humiliation,  wherein  no  virtue  could  be  practised  with- 
out moral  effort.  One  confronted  with  so  imposing  an 
array  of  antagonists  might  well  be  dismayed.  He  w^ould 
be  greatly  tempted  to  think  He  must  be  wrong  when  so 
many  men,  and  of  such  weight  and  quality,  disapproved. 
If  He  still  continued  to  believe  in  Himself  and  in  His 


184  .  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Messianic  mission,  He  could  hardly  escape  being  dis- 
couraged by  prevalent  coldness  and  hostility.  Neither 
effect  was  produced  on  the  mind  of  Jesus.  In  spite  of 
the  disapproval  of  the  sages  He  was  sure  He  was  riglit, 
and  beini?  sure  of  that  He  could  bear  isolation,  thoudi 
valuing  sincere  appreciation.  This  self -certainty  was 
another  fruit  of  a  fellowship  with  the  Father  which 
made  Him  independent  both  of  the  world's  guidance  and 
of  the  world's  friendship.  Through  that  fellowship  He 
knew  the  truth  concerning  Himself  and  the  Kingdom  at 
first  hand,  by  direct  unerring  intuition,  and  needed  not 
the  guidance  of  the  world's  oracles  or  of  the  traditions  of 
men.  When  the  divine  spirit  of  truth  led  Him  into 
non-conforming  paths,  censuring  voices  scared  Him  not ; 
for  the  inward  voice  told  Him  that  He  was  in  the  right 
w^ay,  and  He  could  confidently  declare  the  customs  with 
which  He  was  expected  to  comply  to  be  plants  which 
His  Father  had  not  planted.-^ 

In  all  these  respects  Jesus  exhibited  a  type  of  sonship 
which  may  be  and  ought  to  be  repeated  in  Christians, 
so  that  their  Lord  should  be  only  the  first-born  among 
many  brethren.  Are  there  no  respects  in  which  He 
was  unique,  Son  of  God  in  a  sense  predicable  of  no  one 
but  Himself  ?  In  reply,  I  have  to  admit  that  there 
V  are  no  texts  in  the  synoptical  Gospels  in  which  Divine 
Sonship  in  the  metaphysical  sense  is  ascribed  to  Jesus 
in  a  perfectly  clear,  indisputable  manner.  But  there 
are  some  texts  in  which  a  mysterious  incommunicable 
relation  to  God  seems  darkly  hinted  at.  One  is  that  on 
which  I  have  already  commented  at  some  length,  in 
1  Matt.  XV.  13. 


THE  SON  OF  MAN,  AND  THE  SON  OF  GOD.  185 

the  closing  words  of  which  Jesus  claims  to  be  sole 
revealer  of  God :  "  No  man  knoweth  the  Father  save 
the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  is  pleased  to 
reveal  Him."  This  is  a  claim  almost  as  absolute  as 
that  made  for  the  Logos  in  the  prologue  of  the  fourth 
Gospel  to  be  the  light  of  every  man  that  cometh  into  the 
world.  The  claim  is  not  meant  to  exclude  from  saving 
knowledge  of  God  all  who  are  ignorant  of  the  historical 
Christ.  It  is  meant  rather  to  teach,  that  whoever  has 
such  knowledge,  whether  within  Christendom  or  without, 
gets  his  illumination  from  the  Son  who  perfectly  knows 
the  Father.  Does  not  this  point  to  a  being  of  the  Son 
independent  of  space  and  time  ?  In  the  present  con- 
nection, the  epithet  "  living "  applied  to  God  in  Peter's 
confession  is  not  without  significance.  It  seems  to  indicate 
a  consciousness  on  Peter's  part,  that  in  calling  Jesus  the 
Son  of  God  he  was  saying  a  very  daring  thing,  not  merely 
repeating  one  of  Messiah's  conventional  titles.  Specially 
important  is  the  saying  in  the  eschatological  discourse 
in  which  Jesus  disclaimed  even  for  the  Son  knowledge 
of  the  day  and  hour.^  It  gives  to  the  Son  a  very  lofty 
place  in  the  universe,  superior  to  angels,  second  only 
to  the  Father.  From  the  point  of  view  of  anti-Arian 
controversies,  it  may  seem  to  teach  a  low  doctrine  as  to 
Christ's  divinity ;  but  considered  as  an  authentic  utter- 
ance of  Jesus  concerning  Himself,  its  significance  is 
great.  Finally,  I  need  only  allude  to  the  question  put 
by  Jesus  to  His  adversaries  amid  the  conflicts  of  the 
passion  week  :  "  What  think  ye  of  the  Christ  ?  Whose 
Son  is  He  ?  "  ^  He  did  not  then  reveal  all  that  was  in 
1  Mark  xiii.  32.  2  Matt.  xxii.  42. 


186  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

His  thoughts,  but  He  hinted  at  a  deep  truth  when,  in 
reply  to  the  answer  of  the  Pharisees  to  His  first  question, 
He  propounded  the  second,  "  How  can  David's  son  be 
also  David's  Lord  ? "  It  was  an  allusion  to  something 
more  than  a  merely  official  Messianic  Sonship,  which 
could  hardly  have  puzzled  experts  in  Rabbinic  lore. 

After  the  foregoing  discussion  the  significance  of  the 
two  titles.  Son  of  Man  and  Son  of  God,  in  reference  to 
the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom,  will  be  apparent.  As  Son 
of  Man,  Jesus  stood  in  a  relation  of  solidarity  and  sym- 
pathy with  men.  As  Son  of  God,  He  stood  in  a  similar 
relation  to  God.  As  bearing  both  titles.  He  was  in 
intimate  fellowship  with  both  God  and  man,  and  a  link 
of  connection  between  them.  In  His  person  the  king- 
dom was  thus  realized  in  germ,  as  a  kingdom  of  grace 
in  which  God  is  related  to  men  as  Father,  and  men  are 
related  to  God  as  sons.     "7 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM NEGATIVE  ASPECT. 

"  Seek  ye  the  kingdom  of  God  and  His  righteousness," 
said  Jesus  to  His  hearers  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount, 
co-ordinating  righteousness  with  the  kingdom  as  funda- 
mentally important.  What  is  the  nature  of  the  righteous- 
ness which  the  preacher  thus  commended  as  an  essential 
part  of  the  highest  good  ? 

Christ's  doctrine  of  righteousness  has  two  sides,  a 
negative  and  a  positive.  The  negative  aspect,  with 
which  we  are  now  to  be  occupied,  consists  in  a  criticism 
of  current  ideas  and  practices  in  ethics  and  religion. 
Such  criticism  was  an  unavoidable  task  for  Jesus,  how- 
ever uncongenial.  The  Jewish  mind  was  not  a  tahda 
onset  in  reference  to  righteousness.  A  very  definite  and 
elaborate  system  of  thought  and  action  was  in  full  pos- 
session, with  the  rights  of  prescription  and  the  prestige 
of  authority  on  its  side,  and  one  who  came  with  a 
doctrine  of  his  own  must  of  necessity  compare  it  with 
the  one  in  vogue,  assuming  towards  the  latter  a  polemical 
attitude  in  so  far  as  he  deemed  it  erroneous.  For  similar 
reasons  every  great  ethical  teacher  has  been  compelled  to 
be  more  or  less  controversial.  Moral  polemics  form  a 
conspicuous  feature  in  Hebrew  prophecy.     From  Isaiah 


188  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

to  John  the  Baptist  the  prophets  cried  aloud  and  spared 
not,  showing  the  people  of  Israel  their  transgressions, 
whether  consisting  in  counterfeit  forms  of  piety,  or  in 
deeds  of  flagrant  wickedness.  If  an  ordinary  prophet 
could  not  shirk  the  duty  of  censure,  still  less  could  the 
Christ.  He  must  come  with  the  fan  of  moral  criticism 
in  His  hand,  separating  wheat  from  chaff.  The  Baptist 
was  not  wrong  in  assigning  to  Messiah  a  sifting  function; 
his  only  error  lay  in  a  too  crude  conception  of  the 
process.  As  the  Christ,  Jesus  was  the  bearer  of  the 
moral  ideal  in  its  purity,  and  it  was  incumbent  on  Him 
to  use  all  possible  means  to  make  that  ideal  appear  in  all 
its  divine  beauty  before  the  eyes  of  men.  It  was  not  for 
Him  to  ignore  prevalent  caricatures  and  perversions, 
saying  in  effect :  I  am  not  responsible  for  them,  and 
w^ould  rather  not  speak  of  them.  He  was  no  mere 
private  individual,  who  might  mind  His  own  business 
and  leave  the  world  to  go  its  own  way.  He  was  the 
Servian t  of  God  and  of  mankind  for  righteousness'  sake, 
His  very  vocation  being  to  be  the  light  of  life  to  the 
world.  Men  were  entitled  to  look  to  Him  for  guidance, 
saying :  Lead  us  in  the  path  of  true  righteousness ;  show 
us  the  by-paths  of  error,  that  we  may  not  wander 
therein  to  our  hurt. 

Jesus  loyally  recognised  moral  criticism  as  one  of  the 
perilous  tasks  connected  with  His  Messianic  calling. 
He  knew  that  it  was  urgently  needed ;  that  the  ideas 
current  among  His  people  concerning  righteousness  were 
even  more  widely  divergent  from  truth  than  their  ideas 
concerning  Messiah  and  the  kingdom  of  God ;  and  that 
their   errors   on   all   these   subjects   formed  together  an 


THE  EIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  189 

intricate  network  of  delusion.  And  He  performed  the 
difficult  duty  faithfully,  throughly  purging  the  threshing- 
floor;  yet  in  a  manner  to  which  no  exception  can  be 
taken.  The  manner  of  His  censure  we  do  well  to  note 
before  entering  on  the  matter  of  it,  as  it  may  help  us  to 
appreciate  a  part  of  His  teaching  with  which  the  average 
Christian  only  imperfectly  sympathizes.  His  exposure 
of  Pharisaism  or  Eabbinism,  while  severe,  is  free  from 
violence,  bitterness,  or  undue  emphasis.  There  is,  on 
the  one  hand,  no  hesitation :  the  critic,  even  at  the  early 
period  of  His  ministry,  speaks  as  one  who  has  decidedly 
and  finally  made  up  His  mind  that  the  system  He 
criticises  is  incurably  bad ;  as  in  the  solemn  declaration 
in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  "  Except  your  righteous- 
ness shall  exceed  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  and 
Pharisees,  ye  shall  in  no  case  enter  into  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,"  which  in  effect  pronounces  pharisaic  righteous- 
ness to  be  wholly  chaff.  Yet,  on  the  other  hand,  there 
is  no  unworthy  passion  or  spasmodic  effort  in  utterance ; 
the  description  of  the  system  condemned  is  characterized 
by  self-possession,  dignity,  easy  mastery  and  felicity  of 
style.  "  All  their  works  they  do  to  be  seen  of  men. 
They  make  broad  their  phylacteries,  and  enlarge  the 
borders  of  their  garments,  and  love  the  uppermost  rooms 
at  feasts,  and  the  chief  seats  in  synagogues,  and  greetings 
in  the  markets,  and  to  be  called  of  men,  Piabbi,  Eabbi."^ 
In  such  simple  terms  is  pharisaic  vanity  depicted.  It  is 
the  style  of  one  to  whom  the  whole  subject  is  familiar, 
and  who  contemplates  it  with  an  artist's  placid  penetrat- 
ing eye.  How  much  this  calm  bearing  imports,  we  feel 
1  Matt,  xxiii.  5-7. 


190  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

when  we  compare  it  with  the  temper  in  which  men  of 
noble  spirit  are  wont  to  utter  their  "  everlasting  no " 
against  the  moral  and  religious  counterfeits  of  their  time. 
How  the  protestant  labours  in  utterance,  as  if  he  could 
not  find  words  strong  enough  to  say  all  he  feels,  striving 
by  spasmodic  speech  to  clear  his  sick  soul  of  falsehood ; 
how  by  every  gesture  he  seems  to  say,  ''Get  thee  behind  me, 
Satan  ; "  how  long  it  is  before,  satisfied  with  truth  found, 
he  can  speak  of  lies  renounced  in  measured  teruis,  as  of 
something  external !  Of  these  agonies  of  "  honest  doubt  " 
there  is  no  trace  in  the  life  of  Jesus.  If  they  had  any 
place  in  His  religious  experience,  it  was  before  He  left 
the  retirement  of  Nazareth  to  enter  on  His  public 
ministry. 

The  judgment  of  Jesus  on  the  moral  and  religious  life 
of  His  contemporaries  was  not  only  calm  in  tone,  but 
discriminating.  While  pronouncing  unqualified  condem- 
naiion  on  the  system,  He  was  ready  to  acknowledge  that 
those  who  were  associated  with  it  might  be,  in  the  con- 
ventional sense,  exemplary,  likely  to  pass  in  all  religious 
societies  for  "good"  people.  He  described  them  as 
"  righteous,"  ^  as  men  who  (by  comparison)  needed  no 
repentance,^  as  dutiful  sons  who  did  their  father's  com- 
mandments, and  shunned  lawless,  foolish  ways.^  He 
made  the  typical  Pharisee  describe  himself  as  innocent 
of  vices — extortion,  injustice,  impurity,  and  the  like,  and 
scrupulously  attentive  to  all  religious  duties,  such  as 
fasting  and  tithe-paying,  the  pretensions  of  the  self- 
satisfied  worshipper   being  tacitly  allowed.'^     Even  with 

1  Matt.  ix.  13.  -  Luke  xv.  7. 

3  Lake  xv.  29.  4  Luke  xviii.  11,  12. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  191 

reference  to  the  system  condemned,  He  seems  to  have 
made  the  admission  that  it  was  the  degenerate  issue  of 
a  movement  which  at  its  commencement  had  an  aim 
deserving  of  respect.  So  we  may  understand  the  words 
which  form  the  preface  to  the  great  anti-pharisaic  dis- 
course :  "  The  scribes  and  the  Pharisees  sit  in  Moses' 
seat ;  all  therefore  whatsoever  they  bid  you  observe, 
observe  and  do."  ^  He  could  not  mean  thereby  to  recom- 
mend indiscriminate  compliance  with  all  Eabbinical  pre- 
scriptions, but  He  probably  did  mean  to  acknowledge  the 
legitimacy  and  utility  of  the  original  design  from  which 
Eabbinism  took  its  rise.  That  design  is  explained  in 
the  opening  sentences  of  the  collection  of  sayings  by 
Jewish  scribes  called  the  Pirke-Aboth.  "  Moses,"  we 
read,  "  received  the  Torah  from  Sinai,  and  delivered  it  to 
Jehoshuah,  and  Jehoshuah  to  the  elders,  and  the  elders 
to  the  prophets,  and  the  prophets  to  the  men  of  the 
Great  Synagogue.  They  said  three  things :  Be  deliberate 
in  judgment ;  and  raise  up  many  disciples ;  and  make  a 
fence  to  the  law."  The  three  sayings  ascribed  to  tlie 
ancient  sages  signify :  "  Be  careful  in  deciding  what  the 
law  requires  or  forbids ;  teach  as  many  as  possible  the 
knowledge  of  the  law ;  and  surround  the  law  with 
additional  rules,  as  safeguards  against  trausgression 
through  ignorance  or  inadvertence."  Beforehand  one 
would  pronounce  these  good  and  wholesome  counsels. 
Afterhand,  in  view  of  what  came  out  of  them,  one  might 
very  reasonably  hesitate ;  yet  even  then  it  would  be  only 
fair  to  admit  good  faith  and  good  intention  at  least. 
This  much,  as  I  have  already  indicated,  Jesus  appears 
1  Matt,  xxiii.  2,  3. 


192  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

to  have  conceded,  and  He  doubtless  made  all  parties 
connected  with  the  system — Pharisees,  scribes,  Eabbis — 
welcome  to  the  benefit  of  the  concession.  All  were 
equally  entitled  to  the  benefit,  for  all  were  alike  zealous 
for  the  law,  and  theoretically  or  practically  concerned 
about  its  observance.  The  Pharisee,  as  such,  made  it 
his  business  to  keep  the  law  blamelessly  in  his  own 
conduct.  The  scribe  was  originally  one  who  made 
copies  of  the  law,  but  gradually  he  added  to  the  work  of 
copyist  the  higher  function  of  interpretation.  Hence 
arose  a  large  body  of  opinions  as  to  the  meaning  of  the 
law  uttered  by  successive  generations  of  scribes,  referred 
to  in  the  Gospels  as  "  the  traditions  of  the  elders."  ^  He 
was  the  wise  man  in  Israel  who  was  acquainted  with 
these  legal  opinions,  and  could  cite  them  appositely. 
Lovers  of  wisdom  desired  to  know  such  a  sage  and  to 
hear  him  speak  of  the  law,  giving  his  own  thoughts  and 
quoting  those  of  others.  Out  of  this  desire  sprang 
the  Ptabbinical  schools.  The  Piabbi  was  the  master 
of  such  a  school.  The  same  man  might  be  Piabbi, 
scribe,  Pharisee,  all  in  one.  The  title  Pabbi,  in  our 
Lord's  time,  was  probably  of  recent  origin.  Light- 
foot  conjectures  that  it  was  first  used  in  connection 
with  the  disputes  between  the  schools  of  Hillel  and 
Shammai. 

The  reforming  zeal  for  the  strict  observance  of  the 
Mosaic  law,  which  began  with  Ezra,  was  very  liable  to 
degeneracy  in  many  ways.  The  process  of  degeneracy 
had  reached  an  advanced  stage  in  our  Lord's  time,  and 
the  gravest  of  the  evils  resulting  are  noticed  in  His 
1  Mark  vii.  3. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  19  3 

teaching.  In  the  first  place,  the  movement  inevitably 
led  to  an  enormous  multiplication  of  rules  to  make  the 
written  law  cover  the  whole  ground  of  human  conduct, 
— a  huge  development  of  what  may  be  called  scribe-made 
law ;  a  burden  even  to  think  of,  how  much  more  to 
practise !  ^  However  minute  the  civil  and  ritual  laws 
contained  in  the  Pentateuch  may  seem,  many  points  are 
nevertheless  left  ambiguous  or  indeterminate.  The  rule 
might  indeed  be  sufficiently  definite  to  guide  one  who 
aimed  at  rendering  a  reasonable  obedience,  free  from 
scruples  as  to  insignificant  minutiae.  So,  for  example,  in 
the  case  of  the  law  of  tithes.  But  as  time  went  on,  the 
Jews  came  to  be  more  and  more  of  opinion  that  a  more 
rigorous  kind  of  obedience  was  required  of  them.  Then 
it  became  necessary  to  fix  many  points  which  in  the 
Mosaic  statute  were  left  vague.  The  result  in  reference 
to  the  law  of  tithes  was,  that  to  make  sure  that  a  tenth 
of  one's  possessions  was  given,  it  was  ruled  that  even 
garden  herbs,  mint,  anise,  and  cummin,  etc.,  must  be 
tithed.^  Such  was  the  hedge  set  around  that  particular 
law.  In  Deuteronomy  it  is  written  :  "  Hear,  0  Israel  : 
the  Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord  :  and  thou  shalt  love  the 
Lord  thy  God  with  ail  thine  heart,  and  with  all  thy 
soul,  and  with  all  thy  might.  And  these  words,  which  I 
command  thee  this  day,  shall  be  in  thine  heart ;  and 
thou  shalt  teach  them  diligently  unto  thy  children,  and 
shalt  talk  of  them  when  thou  sittest  in  thine  house,  and 
when  thou  walkest  by  the  way,  and  when  thou  liest 
down,  and  when  thou  risest  up."  ^     The  passage  does  not 

1  Lightfoot,  Horce  Hebraicce,  notes  on  Matt,  xxiii. 

2  Matt,  xxiii.  23.  2  Deut.  vi.  4-7. 

N 


194  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

contain  a  law  in  the  strict  sense  meant  to  be  literally 
kept ;  it  is  rather  a  prophetic  exhortation  whose  general 
spirit  is  to  be  observed.  But  the  scribes  interpreted  it 
rigidly,  and  drew  from  it  the  rule  that  the  Shema,  so 
called  from  the  first  word  of  the  passage  in  the  Hebrew 
text,  should  be  recited  morning  and  evening.  And  legal 
pedantry  did  not  stop  there.  There  were  anxious  dis- 
cussions of  the  question  when  precisely  the  morning  and 
evening  began.  Some  said  it  was  day  when  one  could 
distinguish  blue  from  white  ;  others,  blue  from  green, 
which  is  more  difficult.  With  reference  to  the  evening, 
it  was  agreed  that  the  sign  of  its  coming  was  the 
appearance  of  the  stars,  it  being  written  in  Nehemiah : 
"  So  we  laboured  in  the  work,  and  half  of  them  held  the 
spears  from  the  rising  of  the  morning  till  the  stars 
appeared."  ^  But  Eabbinical  doctors  differed  on  the 
momentous  question  how  many  stars  made  night.  One 
Eabbi  in  high  repute  said  :  If  only  one  star  was  visible, 
it  was  still  day,  for  the  text  in  ]N"ehemiah  says  "  stars  ; " 
if  two  stars  only  were  visible,  it  was  doubtful,  for  the 
first  star  did  not  count ;  but  when  three  were  seen,  night 
had  certainly  arrived.^ 

These  examples  show  what  fencing  the  law  meant,  and 
how  inevitably  it  led  to  indefinite  multiplication  of  rules. 
We  can  faintly  imagine  the  burdensomeness  of  the  vast 
mass  of  Eabbinical  prescriptions  for  those  who  thought 
themselves  bound  to  obey  them  in  order  to  please  God. 
Jesus  alluded  to  this  evil  feature  of  Eabbinism  when  He 
said  :  "  They   bind  heavy   burdens    [and  grievous   to  be 

^  Neh.  iv.  21. 

2  Schwab,  Le  Talmud  de  Jerusalem  ;   Traite  des  Berachoth,  i.  1. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  195 

"borne],  and  lay  them  on  men's  shoulders ; "  ^  and  also 
when  He  described  His  own  yoke  as  easy  and  His  burden 
as  light.^  In  inviting  men  to  take  His  yoke  upon  them, 
He  meant  to  suggest  a  contrast  between  it  and  another 
well-known  yoke  that  was  not  light,  and  said  in  effect : 
"  Galling  is  the  yoke  of  the  Eabbis,  heavy  the  burden  of 
legal  duties  they  impose.  Farewell  to  peace,  rest,  and  free- 
dom, when  ye  enter  their  school.  Sunless  gloom,  hopeless 
bondage,  incessant  irritation  to  reason  and  conscience,  is 
the  lot  of  their  hapless  disciples.  Come  to  Me,  ye  who 
are  weary  of  that  lot,  or  who  dread  it ;  come  to  Me,  and 
find  rest  from  all  that  soul-misery.  For  My  yoke  is  easy. 
The  commands  I  teach  are  not  grievous."  It  was  the 
one  true  Master  offering  deliverance  from  an  oppressive 
spiritual  tyranny.  But  we  may  not  forget  that,  while  in  one 
aspect  tyrants  over  their  disciples,  the  scribes  were  them- 
selves slaves  of  the  system  they  represented  and  helped 
to  perpetuate.  They  were  to  be  pitied  as  well  as  con- 
demned. Masters  and  scholars  were  both  in  the  same 
hapless  predicament.  Jesus  recognised  this  when,  not 
without  a  touch  of  compassion,  He  called  the  teachers  of 
the  law  "  blind  leaders  of-  the  blind."  ^  Yet  it  is  notice- 
able that  in  all  His  allusions  to  the  "  blind  guides,"  *  a 
tone  of  severity  predominates ;  not  without  reason.  The 
disciples  of  the  scribes  were  merely  victims,  sinned 
against  rather  than  sinning,  but  the  masters  were  will- 
ingly the  slaves  of  a  system  which  gave  them  despotic 
power  over  the  consciences  of  others. 

1  Matt,  xxiii.  4  ;  the  words  within  brackets  are  a  doubtful  reading. 
The  idea  expressed  is  implied  in  the  epithet  "heavy." 

2  Matt.  xi.  30.         3  Matt.  xv.  14.         *  Matt,  xxiii.  16,  19,  24,  26. 


196  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

AYlienever  burdens  become  oppressive,  the  over- 
burdened, whether  man  or  beast,  mstinctively  seek  relief. 
When  rules  of  conduct  are  unduly  multiplied  and  made 
vexatiously  minute,  there  inevitably  springs  up  a  desire 
to  evade  them.  So  it  happened  under  the  reign  of  Eab- 
binism.  Eelief  was  sought  from  irksome  statutes  by  the 
invention  of  other  statutes  virtually  cancelling  them. 
As  those  who  make  laws  are  likely  to  be  the  most 
expert  in  the  arts  of  evasion,  we  are  not  surprised  to  find 
our  Lord  hinting  that  the  Eabbinical  law-makers  were 
the  greatest  law-breakers  :  "  They  themselves  will  not 
move  them  (the  burdens)  with  one  of  their  fingers."^ 
The  scribes  were  as  fertile  as  the  Jesuits  in  evasive 
inventions  for  releasing  themselves  and  others  from  the 
obligations  they  had  created,  loosing  where  they  had 
already  bound,  so  making  life  a  constant  game  of  fast  and 
loose.  In  His  anti-pharisaic  discourse  Jesus  cited  instances 
of  this  hypocritical  casuistry  in  connection  with  the  sub- 
ject of  oaths,  representing  the  "  blind  guides  "  as  teaching 
that  an  oath  by  the  temple  or  by  the  altar  was  not  bind- 
ing, and  that  a  man  must  swear  by  the  gold  of  the  temple 
or  by  the  gift  upon  the  altar  in  order  to  be  bound."  The 
examples  selected  are  by  no  means  extreme.  Multitudes 
of  cases  could  be  cited  from  the  Talmud,  showing  the 
system  to  far  greater  disadvantage.  Most  striking  illus- 
trations might  be  taken  from  the  numerous  devices  for 
mitigating  the  rigour  of  the  Sabbath  law  as  fenced  by 
the  scribes.  The  burden  of  Eabbinism  reached  its  maxi- 
mum in  connection  with  the  fourth  commandment.  It 
was  a  saying  current  in  the  schools,  that  the  rules  for  tlie 
1  Matt,  xxiii.  4.  2  ^att.  xxiii.  16-22. 


THE  KIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  197 

observance  of  the  weekly  rest  were  a  mountain  suspended 
by  a  hair,  the  meaning  being  that  the  rules  were  very  many, 
and  their  connection  with  Scripture  very  slight.  Many 
of  them  were  ridiculously  minute,  carrying  the  prohibi- 
tion acjainst  work  and  bearing^  of  burdens  the  lensjth  of 

o  o  o 

absurdity.  The  rubbing  of  the  ears  of  corn  by  the  dis- 
ciples was  reckoned  a  sin  against  the  Sabbath  law, 
because  it  was  a  species  of  thrashing.  A  tailor  might 
not  go  out  with  his  needle  near  dusk  on  Sabbath  eve,  lest 
he  should  forget  he  had  it,  and  carry  it  out  with  him  on  the 
Sabbath  day.  For  the  same  reason  the  scribe  might  not 
go  out  at  that  time  with  his  pen  behind  his  ear.  A  man 
miiijht  not  wear  on  Sabbath  sandals  weio-hted  with  nails. 
It  was  not  agreed  whether  a  cripple  might  on  that  day 
wear  his  wooden  leg.  A  thing  might  be  moved  within  a 
house  from  one  end  to  the  other,  but  only  four  ells  in  a 
public  place.  An  endless  series  of  rules,  conceived  in 
this  spirit,  was  fitted  to  make  the  day  of  rest  an  insup- 
portable horror.  But  mitigations  were  ingeniously  pro- 
vided. A  whole  treatise  of  the  Mishnah  is  devoted  to 
contrivances  for  easing  the  pressure  of  the  Sabbatic  yoke, 
especially  in  reference  to  the  length  of  a  Sabbath-day 
journey,  and  the  distance  to  which  things,  such  as  articles 
of  food,  might  be  carried.  This  was  achieved  by  the 
method  of  connections,  in  Eabbinical  dialect  Erubin. 
Several  houses  standing  in  one  court,  e.g.,  might  be  formed 
into  one  house  by  the  separate  householders  agreeing  to 
deposit  an  article  of  food  at  a  certain  spot  in  the  court. 
One  desirous  of  making  a  journey  longer  than  two  thou- 
sand paces  might  lawfully  do  so  by  depositing  food  for 
two  meals  near  the  legal  limit,  whereby  the  spot  where 


198  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  food  was  deposited  became  his  domicile,  so  that  after 
having  travelled  already  the  legal  distance,  he  might  set 
out  from  that  point  and  travel  as  far  again,  and  so  on 
od  libitum} 

Except  as  fostering  the  s^Dirit  of  chicanery,  the  cancel- 
ling of  one  set  of  Eabbinical  rules  by  another  may  appear 
no  great  evil.  A  much  more  serious  mischief  flowing 
from  the  multiplication  ad  infinitum  of  petty  precepts, 
was  the  neglect  and  transgression  of  the  great  command- 
ments of  God.  Eabbinism  began  by  making  a  hedge 
about  the  law,  and  it  ended  by  substituting  the  hedge 
in  place  of  the  law.  The  means  supplanted  the  end. 
So  complete  was  the  process,  that  the  abuse  was  accepted 
by  public  opinion  as  the  right  order  of  things.  The 
superiority  of  the  tradition  to  the  law  was  openly  pro- 
claimed. They  compared  the  law  to  salt  and  the 
traditions  to  pepper,  the  law  to  water  and  the  traditions 
to  wine.  They  spoke  of  the  study  of  the  law  as  a 
matter  of  indifference,  but  of  the  study  of  the  tradi- 
tions as  a  duty  and  a  virtue.  Jesus  pointed  at  this  evil 
when  He  described  the  Pharisees  as  paying  tithes  of 
mint  and  anise  and  cummin,  and  omitting  the  weightier 
matters  of  the  law,  judgment,  mercy,  and  faith ;  and 
as  straining  out  a  gnat  and  swallow^ing  a  camel.^  He 
gave  a  special  example  of  this  tendency  when,  to  sub- 
stantiate   the   charge  of  making  the  commandments  of 

1  Vide  Schwab,  Le  Talmud  de  Jerusalem,  tome  4ieme  •  Trai(es 
Scliahhath  et  Erouhin.  In  Edersheim's  Life  and  Times  of  Jesus  the 
Messiah,  vol.  ii.  appendix  xvii.,  English  readers  will  find  a  full 
analysis  of  the  Sabbath  law  as  set  forth  in  the  Mishnah  and  the 
Jerusalem  Talmud. 
Matt,  xxiii.  23,  24. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  199 

God  of  none  effect  by  their  traditions,  He  alluded  to 
the  Eabbinical  maxim,  that  merely  to  call  a  thing 
corlaii  made  it  impossible  for  a  man  to  use  it  even 
for  the  most  benevolent  purposes,  such  as  rendering- 
assistance  to  his  parents/  It  was  only  one  of  many 
ways  in  which  the  evil  genius  of  Pharisaism  brought 
about  a  most  disastrous  divorce  between  religion  and 
morality. 

Kindred  to  the  foregoing  evil  in  nature  and  tendency 
was  the  externcdism  of  Pharisaism.  This  was  an  inherent 
vice  of  the  system.  The  whole  attention  was  fixed  on 
the  outward  rule :  that  complied  with,  the  requirements 
of  Eabbinical  righteousness  were  satisfied.  Hence  it 
was  possible  for  a  man  to  regard  himself  and  be  regarded 
by  others  as  righteous,  while  in  spirit  he  was  far  from 
God  and  goodness.  As  the  little  commandments  of  the 
scribes  made  men  forget  the  great  commandments  of 
God ;  so  the  external  rules  of  the  scribes  made  them 
overlook  the  world  within,  the  heart  and  its  dispositions. 
In  point  of  fact,  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  very 
often  coexisted  with  many  base  affections.  This  com- 
bination, patent  to  the  eyes  of  the  discerning,  Jesus 
exposed  in  some  of  His  most  pungent  sayings,  as  when 
He  compared  the  scribes  and  Pharisees  to  whited 
sepulchres  which  appeared  beautiful  without,  but  within 
were  full  of  dead  men's  bones  and  all  uncleanness ;  ^ 
and  represented  them  as  making  clean  the  outside  of  the 
cup  and  of  the  platter,  while  within  they  were  full  of 
extortion  and  excess.^     The  words  may  seem  severe,  but 

1  Matt.  XV.  4-6.  2  jyxatt.  xxiii.  27. 

3  Matt,  xxiii.  25,  26. 


200  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

they  are  only  a  graphic  description  of  the  actual  fact. 
Pharisaic  righteousness,  through  its  externalism,  not  only 
coexisted  with,  but  even  tended  to  produce,  certain  vices 
of  the  spirit.  Conspicuous  among  these  was  vanity  or 
ostentation,  the  moral  feature  of  Pharisaism  on  which 
Jesus  chiefly  remarked  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount. 
"  They  do  their  works  to  be  seen  of  men,"  He  said  over 
and  over  again,  in  reference  to  such  duties  as  almsgiving, 
praying,  and  fasting.-^  It  was  the  most  obvious  moral 
characteristic,  thrusting  itself  on  the  observation  of  all, 
therefore  specially  fit  to  be  mentioned  in  a  popular 
discourse.  It  was,  moreover,  a  very  significant  character- 
istic. It  was  the  natural  outcome  of  the  Eabbinical 
system.  The  whole  superstructure  of  scribe-made  law 
rested  on  opinion.  The  traditions  of  the  elders  were  the 
dicta  of  individual  scribes.  How  natural  that  those  who 
practised  a  righteousness  based  on  opinion  should  make 
their  appeal  to  opinion,  study  appearance,  and  almost 
regard  ostentation  as  a  duty !  Thus  they  justified  them- 
selves before  men,^  and  sought  honour  one  of  another. 
And  they  had  their  reward.  Mutual  admiration  and 
flattery  became  the  order  of  the  day.  Disciples  did 
homage  to  their  masters  by  calling  them  Ptabbi,  and 
receiving  their  sayings  as  oracles.  Masters  rewarded 
with  an  a];)proving  smile  disciples  who  strictly  observed 
their  precepts. 

Along   with    ostentation   goes   self-complacency.      He 
who    loves    the    praise  of   men   praises   himself.       Self- 
flattery   found    in    Eabbinism    a   congenial    atmosphere. 
To  become  eminently  righteous  a  man  had  but  to  be  an 
1  Matt.  vi.  1-18.  2  L^^ke  xvi.  15. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  201 

extremist  in  opinion  and  practice,  following  the  straitest 
sect.  The  more  absurdity,  the  greater  sanctity.  The 
novice  might  find  some  difficulty  in  believing  that  there 
could  be  any  merit  in  compliance  with  ridiculous  rules. 
But  that  initial  difficulty  once  overcome,  fanaticism  could 
feed  pride  by  going  in  for  the  strictest  style  of  observ- 
ance. Judging  from  the  parable  of  the  Pharisee  and  the 
publican,  there  seems  to  have  been  no  lack  of  self-admir- 
ing devotees  in  our  Lord's  day.  The  typical  representa- 
tive of  Pharisaism  thanks  God  he  is  so  good  a  man, 
and  enumerates  with  complacency  his  virtues,  pro- 
minent amonoj  which  is  strictness  in  fastincj  and 
tithe-paying,  belonging  to  the  artificial  region  of  will- 
w^orship. 

The  natural  companion  of  self-esteem  is  censoriousness. 
To  lower  others  is  an  easy  way  to  exalt  ourselves. 
Besides,  the  Pharisee  could  hardly  help  thinking  ill  of 
ordinary  men.  The  devotee  despises  the  man  of  the 
world  quite  as  naturally  as  the  man  of  the  world  despises 
him.  If  goodness  consist  in  cultivating  artificial  virtues, 
then  certainly  the  greater  part  of  the  world  lies  in 
wickedness.  How  could  a  Pharisee  fail  to  have  a  low 
opinion  of  "  publicans  and  sinners  "  ?  and  in  what  other 
aspect  could  the  pagan  world  appear  to  his  eyes  than 
as  a  vast  territory  full  of  darkness  and  uncleanness  ? 
Accordingly,  in  the  Gospels,  inhuman  contempt  for 
others  not  of  his  coterie  appears  as  an  outstanding  trait 
in  the  character  of  the  Jewish  religionist.  The  typical 
Pharisee  thanks  God  he  is  not  as  the  rest  of  men,  who 
are  conceived  to  be  given  up  to  the  grossest  vices ; 
adding,  "  or  even  as  this  publican,"  as  if  a  publican  were 


202  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

an  epitome  of  all  the  sins.  The  pharisaic  party  sneered 
at  Jesus  Himself  as  "  the  friend  of  publicans  and 
sinners,"  ^  not  deeming  it  possible  to  say  a  worse  thing 
of  Him.  The  self-styled  saints  and  sages  of  Jud£ea,  who 
prided  themselves  on  their  wisdom  and  their  goodness, 
regarded  with  sanctimonious  abhorrence  the  people  who 
lacked  legal  lore  and  neglected  Eabbinical  traditions. 
"  I  hate,"  said  they  in  their  hearts,  "  the  profane  rabble." 
Jesus  had  this  haughtiness  in  His  view  when  He 
described  Himself  as  "  meek  and  lowly."  ^  With  pity 
in  His  heart  for  the  neglected  multitude,  who  were  as 
a  flock  of  sheep  without  a  shepherd,  the  true  Shepherd 
of  Israel  said :  "  Come  unto  Me,  all  ye  burdened  ones, 
whether  laden  with  ignorance,  social  degradation,  or  sin ; 
come  unto  Me,  for  I  am  not  haughty,  like  these  wise  and 
holy  men  who  scorn  and  repel  you.  However  unlearned 
or  unholy,  come  unto  Me,  for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in 
heart,  and  will  not  cast  you  out." 

These  vices  of  the  spirit,  vanity,  self-complacency, 
contemptuousness,  appeared  in  the  characters  even  of 
sincere  Pharisees.  They  were  inseparable  from  the 
system.  In  some  the  fashionable  piety  was  associated 
with  baser  passions,  and  served  as  a  cloak  for  iniquity. 
The  third  evangelist  remarks  of  the  Pharisees  generally 
that  they  were  covetous,"  and  Jesus  repeated  the  charge 
in  an  aggravated  form  when  He  represented  the  scribes 
as  devouring  widows'  houses,  and  for  a  pretence  making 
long  prayers.'^     He  gave  to  the  grave  accusation  a  still 

1  Matt.  xi.  19.  2  Matt.  xi.  29.  »  Luke  xvi.  14. 

^  Mark  xii.  40 ;   Luke  xx.  47.     The  passage  as  found  in  Matt. 
xxiii.  14  is  not  crenuine. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  203 

wider  scope  when  He  compared  the  hypocritical  Pharisees 
to  cups  clean  without,  and  within  full  of  extortion  and 
excess.^  What  a  character  for  apparently  holy  men: 
wearing  an  aspect  of  austere  unworldliness,  yet  all  the 
while  robbers  and  libertines  1  But  surely  these  were 
merely  accidental  monstrosities,  of  no  significance  in 
reference  to  the  system  ?  Not  so ;  the  system  by  its 
externalism  made  the  occurrence  of  such  characters  not 
only  possible  but  certain.  It  gave  bad  men  a  tempting 
opportunity  to  use  religion  not  only  as  a  mask,  but  even 
as  a  means  for  promoting  nefarious  designs.  A  man 
could  comply  with  all  Eabbinic  requirements,  and  even 
gain  golden  opinions  by  his  public  profession  of  piety, 
and  yet  be  an  utter  miscreant.  The  worse  the  man,  the 
more  religious  he  was  likely  to  be,  because  he  found  it 
profitable.  The  righteousness  in  vogue  put  a  premium 
on  hypocrisy,  and  by  that  fact  it  was  hopelessly  con- 
demned. The  hypocrite,  consummate  at  once  in  "  right- 
eousness "  and  in  iniquity,  was  the  redudio  ad  dbsurdum 
of  Rabbinism,  as  he  was  its  ripe  fruit. 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  judge  with  what  truth 
Jesus  taught  that  pharisaic  righteousness  lay  entirely 
outside  the  kingdom  of  God.  It  is  in  connection  with 
the  externalism  of  that  righteousness  that  the  truth  of 
the  allegation  becomes  most  apparent.  Pharisaism  laid 
exclusive  stress  on  the  outward  act ;  whence  it  came  to 
pass,  as  we  have  seen,  that  legal  piety  might  be  associated 
with  various  evil  dispositions.  In  the  kingdom  of  God, 
on  the  contrary,  no  action  has  value  except  in  connection 
with  motives  and  dispositions.  One  great  aim  of  the 
1  Matt,  xxiii.  25. 


204:  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Sermon  on  the  Mount  is  to  proclaim  this  great  principle 
in  opposition  to  current  notions.  Hence  the  unfavour- 
able verdict  on  Pharisaism  is  placed  near  the  beginning  of 
the  discourse.  It  is  the  thesis  which  the  Preacher  means 
to  illustrate,  by  setting  the  outward  righteousness  of  the 
Pharisee  and  the  inward  righteovisness  of  the  kingdom 
over  against  each  other.  The  contrast  is  so  drawn 
as  to  bring  into  prominence  the  virtues  opposed  to  the 
most  characteristic  pharisaic  vices.  First,  in  a  series 
of  examples,  the  inwardness  of  true  righteousness  is 
opposed  to  the  outwardness  of  the  counterfeit.'^  Then 
over  against  pharisaic  ostentation  is  set  the  grace  of 
modesty.^  Single-minded  sincerity  is  next  commended 
in  opposition  to  the  double-heartedness  so  often  exhibited 
in  the  pharisaic  character  through  the  combination  of 
religion  with  worldliness.^  Then  the  odious  pharisaic 
vice  of  censoriousness  is  animadverted  on,  and  by  implica- 
tion it  is  taught  that  the  genuine  citizen  of  the  kingdom 
judges  himself  rather  than  others."* 

In  its  other  leading  characteristics — the  burdensome- 
ness  of  its  innumerable  enactments,  the  chicanery  to  which 
it  had  recourse  to  ease  the  self-made  burden,  and  its  ten- 
dency to  neglect  great  duties  in  zeal  for  trifling  observ- 
ances— Pharisaism  was  equally  alien  from  the  kingdom 
of  God.  That  kingdom  is  a  kingdom  of  liberty  ;  it  abhors 
tyranny  and  oppression ;  Jesus,  the  living  embodiment 
of  its  spirit,  said  truly :  "  My  yoke  is  easy,  and  My  burden 
is  light."  It  was  His  passionate  love  of  spiritual  free- 
dom  that  constrained  Him  to  denounce  the  evil  thing, 

1  Matt.  V.  21-42.  ^  ^^^tt.  vi.  1-18. 

3  Matt.  vi.  19-24.  "*  Matt.  vii.  1-5. 


THE  EIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KIXGDOM.  205 

and  for  this  brave  deed  humanity  owes  Him  a  deep  debt 
of  gratitude.  It  is  further  a  kingdom  of  truth ;  not  of 
"  the  truth,"  or  of  religious  orthodoxy,  that  is  the  theo- 
logical perversion — Rabbinism  rediviviis  under  new  con- 
ditions ;  but  in  the  sense  of  moral  simplicity.  Sophistry 
can  find  no  harbour  within  its  borders.  Its  yea  is  yea, 
and  its  nay,  nay.  Finally,  it  is  a  kingdom  in  which  the 
moral  ideal  in  its  purity  reigns  supreme.  It  values  not  a 
fear  of  God  taught  by  the  traditions  of  men.  It  requires  of 
its  subjects  only  that  they  do  justly,  love  mercy,  and  walk 
humbly  with  God.  In  all  these  respects  Pharisaism  was 
without  the  kingdom.  And  it  shut  the  kingdom  against 
those  who,  but  for  its  influence,  might  have  entered  in.^ 
For  one  Paul  who  escaped,  as  if  by  miracle,  from  its  malign 
thraldom,  many  were  enslaved  and  perverted  for  ever. 
In  view  of  this  melancholy  fact,  the  sombre  declaration 
of  Jesus  concerning  the  straitness  of  the  gate  and  the 
narrowness  of  the  way  leading  to  life  becomes  intelligible.^ 
The  gate  is  strait  and  the  way  narrow,  because  the 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom  is  spiritual,  and  the  majority 
prefer  the  beaten  path  of  legalism.  If  any  one,  w^eary  of 
the  Eabbinical  yoke,  seek  admittance,  he  will  find  the 
gate  wide  enough.  The  road  indeed  has  all  the  breadth 
required  for  a  world's  highway ;  for  it  is  important  to 
observe  that  the  spirituality  which  contracts  the  entrance 
to  the  kingdom  is  precisely  that  which  fits  Christianity 
to  be  a  universal  religion. 

It  remains  to  add  that,  apart  from  abuses,  the  method 
of  Eabbinism,  however  natural  in  the  circumstances  amidst 
which  it  took  its  rise,  was  alien  from  the  kingdom  of  God 
1  Matt,  xxiii.  13.  2  j^Xatt.  vii.  13,  14. 


206  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

It  fenced  the  law  against  violation  by  an  immense  mass 
of  precautionary  rules.  The  method  of  the  kingdom  is 
to  have  the  law  written  on  the  heart.  Thereby  the 
keeping  of  all  that  is  essential  is  effectually  provided  for. 
What  cannot  be  protected  in  that  way  is  of  only  secondary 
and  temporary  significance. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM POSITIVE  ASPECT. 

Having  ascertained  what  the  righteousness  of  the  king- 
dom is  not,  we  have  now  to  consider  what  it  is. 

Jesus  called  it  the  righteousness  of  God}  In  absence 
of  evidence,  we  are  not  justified  in  assuming  that  He 
used  this  name  in  the  technical  and  peculiar  sense  which 
it  bears  in  the  Pauline  theology.  We  may,  however, 
take  for  granted  that  He  meant  thereby  a  righteousness 
of  which  God  is  the  centre.  That  will  imply :  right 
thoughts  about  God,  without  which  it  is  impossible  to  be 
righteous  in  our  highest  relations ;  likeness  to  God  in 
that  which  is  most  characteristic  of  Him  as  revealed  to 
our  faith  in  the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom,  viz.  charity,  our 
righteousness  tow^ards  men ;  realizing  the  ideal  of  man 
as  God's  son,  our  righteousness  towards  ourselves ;  imita- 
tion of  Christ,  the  Son  of  God  and  Son  of  man,  in  whom 
the  divine  and  human  meet,  the  righteousness  of  disciple- 
ship  ;  devotion  to  the  interests  of  the  kingdom,  which  is 
an  end  for  God,  and  which  ought  to  be  for  us  at  once 
chief  end  and  chief  good — the  righteousness  of  citizens. 

1  Matt.  vi.  33.  I  do  not  forget  the  critical  doubts  which  have  been 
expressed  regarding  the  originality  of  this  clause  in  Matthew's  ver- 
sion of  the  saying.  It  is  enough  for  my  purpose  that  Jesus  might 
have  used  the  expression,  it  being  congruous  to  His  teaching. 

"207 


208  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Plight  thoughts  of  God  are  at  once  the  beginning  of 
true  righteousness,  and  that  on  which  the  quahty  of  all 
the  other  elements  depends.  In  other  words,  ethically 
right  conduct  has  its  foundation  in  true  religion.  A 
wrong  idea  of  God  was  the  secret  of  all  Rabbinical  errors. 
The  scribes  believed  in  a  far-off  God.  This  fact  Jesus 
pointed  at  when  He  quoted  the  words  of  the  prophet 
Isaiah  as  applicable  to  them,  "  This  people  honoureth  Me 
with  their  lips,  but  their  heart  is  far  from  Me."  ^  His 
immediate  intention,  doubtless,  was  to  suc^crest  a  charoje  of 
insincerity,  as  the  epithet  "  hypocrites "  applied  to  the 
same  persons  shows ;  but  we  may  legitimately  give  to  the 
prophetic  words  a  wider  scope,  so  as  to  make  it  contain  a 
description  of  Eabbinical  piety  even  at  its  best,  and  in 
its  essential  character  as  the  worship  of  a  far-off  God  not 
revealing  Himself  directly  to  the  heart,  but  only  through 
an  ever-lengthening  chain  of  legal  tradition.  So  under- 
stood, the  words  declared  the  truth  very  exactly.  The 
God  of  Jewish  theology  at  the  beginning  of  our  era  stood 
at  the  remote  end  of  a  long  series  of  mediators  through 
whom  the  law  was  handed  down.  The  Deity,  too  exalted 
to  have  direct  dealings  even  with  the  greatest  of  mortals, 
first  gave  it  to  angels,^  angels  then  gave  it  to  Moses,  then 
Moses  gave  it  to  Joshua,  then  Joshua  to  the  elders,  then 
the  elders  to  the  prophets,  then  the  prophets  to  the  men 
of  the  Great  Synagogue,  from  whom  it  passed  through 
successive  generations  of  scribes  to  the  contemporaries  of 
Jesus.     How  feeble  the  sense  of  the  divine  presence  in 

1  Mark  vii.  6. 

2  For  references  to  the  mediation  of  angels,  see  Acts  vii.  53  ;  Gal. 
iii.  19  ;  Heb.  ii.  2. 


THE  EIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  209 

the  law  must  have  been  after  so  lengthened  a  process  of 
transmission,  and  how  degenerate  the  type  of  reverence 
whereof  the  divinity  at  the  far-off  end  could  be  the  object ! 
Even  the  God  of  Sinai  was  an  awful  Being  who  influenced 
His  worshippers  mainly  through  fear,  and  upheld  His 
majesty  by  keeping  sinful  mortals  at  a  respectful  dis- 
tance. But  He  could  at  least  inspire  wholesome  dread 
by  His  thunders  and  lightnings,  and  so  compel  a  rude 
people  to  yield  at  least  an  outward  obedience  to  His 
behests.  But  the  sombre  accompaniments  of  the  law- 
giving lay  far  back  in  history,  and  the  God  of  the  scribe, 
divested  of  Sinaitic  terrors,  had  sunk  into  a  very  ancient 
Eabbi,  who  supplied  the  original  text  whereon  the  com- 
mentators exercised  their  wits.  Such  a  God  could  awaken 
neither  fear  nor  respect.  He  must  be  the  object  either 
of  an  imbecile  superstition,  or  of  utter  contempt.-^ 

This  Eabbinical  idol  Jesus  replaced  by  God  the 
Father.  He  is  not  a  far-off  God ;  for  though  He  be  the 
Father  in  heaven,  He  is  also  near  at  hand  speaking  to 
men  in  their  hearts,  and  through  their  family  relations ; 
not  far  from  any  one  of  them,  even  the  most  wayward, 
seeking  their  good  always.  He  was  not  without  a 
witness  even  in  the  hearts  of  the  Eabbis,  as  is  proved  by 
this  saying  ascribed  to  one  of  them  :  "  Be  bold  as  a 
leopard,  and  swift  as  an  eagle,  and  fleet  as  a  hart,  and 

^  The  rabbinizing  of  tbe  idea  of  God  came  about  gradually.  The 
older  Rabbinism  of  the  Targums  insisted  on  the  unity  and  transcend- 
ence of  God,  jealously  guarding  against  anthropopathism.  The  later 
Rabbinism  transformed  God  into  a  Rabbi  who  studied  the  law  in 
heaven  with  other  beatified  Rabbis,  and  carefully  observed  all  Rab- 
binical rules.  Vide  Weber,  System  der  xiltsynagogalen  Paliistiidschen 
Theologie,  pp.  146-159. 

0 


210  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD, 

strong  as  a  lion,  to  do  the  will  of  thy  Father  which  is 
in  heaven."  ^ 

The  change  introduced  by  Jesus  in  the  way  of  think- 
ing concerning  God  was  of  infinite  practical  consequence. 
It  altered  the  whole  character  of  religion  and  life. 
Belief  in  the  Father- God  makes  child-like  trust  and 
rational  reverence  possible  and  even  inevitable.  From 
the  heart  one  can  desire  that  the  name  of  this  God  may 
be  hallowed  and  that  His  will  may  be  done.  "  All  that 
is  within"  a  man  blesses  the  Benignant  One.  Worship 
becomes  eloquent  and  obedience  spontaneous.  Faith  in 
the  Divine  Father  hath,  moreover,  a  magic  power  to 
emancipate  from  the  yoke  of  man-made  ordinances. 
Faith  in  a  far-off  Ptabbinical  God,  Himself  a  Eabbi  in 
temper,  enslaves  to  tradition  which  thereby  becomes  the 
real  deity.  Faith  in  the  God  who  reveals  Himself  to 
the  heart  instinctively  understands  that  this  God  desires 
spiritual  worship  —  the  free  rational  homage  of  mind, 
heart,  and  conscience.  From  the  moment  one  knows  this 
truth  he  is  free ;  the  grievous  burden  of  ordinances  drops 
off  the  shoulders,  and  the  tyranny  of  tradition  is  at  an  end. 

To  him  who  believes  in  the  heavenly  Father  pro- 
claimed by  Jesus  it  is  counted  for  righteousness  in  the 
kingdom.  His  faith  evinces  a  pure  heart  in  which  the 
divine  image  can  mirror  itself,  and  it  will  lead  on  to  still 
higher  measures  of  purity. 

Eight  thoughts  of  God  naturally  lead  to  imitation  of 

divine  virtues.     Now  the  most  characteristic  attribute  of 

the   God  whom  Jesus    preached   is   charity ;    benignant 

gracious    love    of    men,    clear    of    all    particularism    or 

^  Pirke-Aboth. 


THE  KIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  211 

partiality.  Of  course  the  Divine  Father  is  holy,  but  to 
say  of  a  god  that  he  is  holy  is  to  say  little,  for  holiness 
in  some  sense  is  predicated  of  all  the  gods  by  all 
peoples.  The  vital  question  is,  What  is  the  quality  of 
the  holiness  ?  In  this  respect  gods  differ  widely.  The 
holiness  of  pagan  gods  was  compatible  with  the  grossest 
immorality.  The  holiness  of  the  Eabbinical  God  was 
purely  negative,  consisting,  like  that  of  the  Pharisees,  in 
keeping  aloof  from  the  evil.  Jesus  ascribed  to  God  a 
holiness  of  an  essentially  different  character,  by  repre- 
senting love  as  His  most  prominent  moral  attribute, 
thereby  transforming  the  idea  of  holiness  as  completely 
as  He  transformed  the  ideas  of  the  kingdom  and  of  the 
Messiah.  "  Love  your  enemies,"  He  said,  and  so  shall  ye 
"  be  the  children  of  your  Father  who  is  in  heaven."  ^ 
He  required  such  as  would  be  citizens  of  the  kingdom  to 
love  those  they  were  naturally  tempted  to  hate,  and 
whom  custom  allowed  them  to  hate,  on  the  ground  that 
thereby  they  should  be  imitators  of  God ;  so  indirectly 
teaching  that  God  loves  those  whom  He  is  supposed  to 
hate,  pagans,  publicans,  sinners,  nature's  non  -  elect, 
society's  reprobates,  and  that  His  holiness  is  a  social 
sympathetic  thing  which  is  ever  seeking  to  communicate 
itself  to  others  who  greatly  stand  in  need  of  it.  In 
giving  this  counsel  He  pointed  out  a  way  whereby  His 
disciples  might  fulfil  all  righteousness  towards  men,  and 
be  perfect  even  as  their  Father  in  heaven  is  perfect.^  If 
they  could  love  their  enemies  they  would,  of  course,  love 
their  friends,  as  even  publicans  and  pagans  did,^  their 
fellow-countrymen,  and  their  fellow -disciples.  The 
1  Matt.  V.  44.  2  Matt.  v.  48.  »  Matt.  v.  46,  47. 


212  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

difficulty  is  to  love  one  whose  behaviour  towards  us 
provokes  us  to  anger  or  hatred.  Therefore  Christ 
insisted  mainly  on  the  more  arduous  and  heroic  type  of 
beneficence,  saying :  "  Eesist  not  evil ;  but  whosoever  will 
smite  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the  other 
also ;  and  if  any  man  will  sue  thee  at  the  law,  and  take 
away  thy  coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloak  also ;  and  whoso- 
ever shall  compel  thee  to  go  one  mile,  go  with  him 
twain."  ^  The  high  doctrine  thus  taught  in  the  Sermon 
on  the  Mount,  Jesus  repeated  in  the  parable  of  The  Good 
Samaritan^^  In  that  parable  the  term  "  neighbour "  is 
set  free  from  all  artificial  or  conventional  restrictions,  and 
made  to  mean :  any  one  that  needs  help  and  whom  it  is 
in  my  power  to  help,  even  though  it  should  turn  out  to 
be  one  belonging  to  a  hated  nationality  whom  all  my 
religious  and  racial  prejudices  would  tempt  me  to  injure 
rather  than  succour.  Love,  humane,  catholic,  all-embrac- 
ing, that  cannot  be  overcome  of  evil,  is  thus  declared  to 
be  the  fulfilling  of  the  law  in  so  far  as  it  requires  us  to 
do  justly  to  others.  At  this  point  the  righteousness  of 
the  kingdom  is  seen  to  be  a  synonym  for  goodness,  which 
goes  far  beyond  what  men  can  demand  as  their  legal  due. 
It  is  a  reflection  of  the  righteousness  of  the  Father,  the 
absolutely,  unapproachably  good.^ 

'  Matt.  V.  39-41.  These  precepts  of  Jesus  have  received  their 
most  reahstic  interpretation  in  recent  times  from  Count  Tolstoi,  for 
•Nvhose  views,  as  expressed  in  Ma  Rdigion,  in  point  of  sincerity  and 
moral  earnestness  I  entertain  profound  respect,  though  I  cannot 
help  finding  in  them  a  tinge  of  that  ascetic  rigour  which  is  the 
natural  reaction  from  an  early  life  of  pleasure,  in  the  case  of  one  so 
richly  gifted  in  intellect  and  heart. 

2  Luke  X.  30.  3  ^att.  v.  48,  xix.  1 7. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  213 

Acceptance  of  Christ's  doctrine  of  God  involves  accept- 
ance of  His  kindred  doctrine  of  man.  The  believer  in 
the  Father  becomes  conscious  of  his  vocation  to  the 
privileges  and  responsibilities  of  sonship.  Out  of  this 
consciousness  springs  earnest  endeavour  to  live  under  the 
influence  of  the  filial  spirit.  Through  a  life  so  ordered 
is  fulfilled  the  righteousness  of  sonship,  which  is  a  two- 
sided  righteousness,  having  a  relation  to  God  on  the  one 
hand,  and  to  the  ideal  of  manhood  on  the  other.  What 
the  component  elements  of  this  righteousness  are  I  have 
already  had  occasion  to  point  out  in  analysing  the  filial 
consciousness  of  Christ ;  for  His  Sonship  and  that  of  V 
Christians  are  to  a  great  extent  identical  in  character,  it 
being  His  will  to  reveal  unto  His  disciples  the  Father  as 
He  Himself  knows  Him,  and  is  known  of  Him.^  First 
there  is  filial  submission  and  devotion  to  the  Father's 
will.  In  action  and  in  suffering,  in  work  and  in  lot,  the 
motto  of  sonship  is,  "  God's  will  be  done."  Its  chief  end 
is  the  divine  glory ;  that  secured,  it  is  content  to  fill  a 
little  space  or  to  bear  a  heavy  cross.  To  be  a  son  of 
God  to  this  effect  is  not  easy.  It  is  possible  only 
through  a  deadly  struggle  with,  and  victory  over,  self. 
To  reach  this  higher  life  of  sonship  in  which  the  ideal  of 
our  nature  is  fulfilled,  we  must  lose  the  lower  life  of 
natural  self-will.  The  spirit  of  sonship  is  a  heroic  spirit, 
seen  at  its  best  and  purest  in  the  pioneers  of  the  kingdom 
whose  lot  it  is  to  toil  and  endure ;  a  career  most 
honourable,  but  also  arduous.  The  true  sons  of  God 
are  to  be  sought  among  those  who  are  persecuted  for 
righteousness'  sake,  in  the  glorious  company  of  prophets, 
1  Matt.  xi.  27.     Vide  pp.  180-4. 


214  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

apostles,  and  martyrs.  Self-seekers  are  never  to  be 
found  in  such  company.  They  may  enrol  themselves 
among  the  servants  of  God,  and  profess  to  aim  at  the 
advancement  of  God's  glory  and  the  interests  of  His 
kingdom ;  but  they  seek  these  only  when  there  is  a 
prospect  of  personal  advantage.  Their  place  is  not 
among  the  pioneers  of  a  despised  cause,  but  among  the 
promoters  of  a  movement  which  is  already  prosperous. 
They  have  their  reward,  but  it  is  not  to  be  reckoned 
among  the  genuine  sons  of  God. 

Next  comes  the  spirit  of  confident  trust  in  the  Father's 
good-will,  raising  above  all  ignoble  fear  and  sordid  care, 
and  making  it  possible  to  leave  the  morrow  to  take 
thought  for  the  things  of  itself.  To  this  life  of  noble 
carelessness  Jesus  exhorted  His  hearers  when  He  bade 
them  take  no  thought  what  they  should  eat  or  drink  or 
put  on ;  and  He  suggested  two  aids  to  its  attainment, 
viz.  consideration  of  the  dignity  of  human  life,  and  trust 
in  the  heavenly  Father's  care.  "  Is  not  the  life  more 
than  meat  ?  "  He  asked  ;  and  in  proof  of  the  reality  of  a 
paternal  Providence  He  pointed  to  the  fowls  of  the  air 
and  the  flowers  of  the  field.  A  man,  He  said  in  effect, 
has  higher  work  to  do  than  to  win  a  livelihood,  and  he 
may  safely  leave  these  minor  concerns  in  the  hands  of 
Him  who  feeds  the  birds  and  decks  the  lilies.  Beauti- 
ful words,  and  not  less  noble  the  temper  they  inculcate  ! 
How  great  is  the  man  who  can  really  be,  not  by  natural 
easy-mindedness,  but  by  faith  and  devotion  to  the  higher 
ends  of  life,  as  free  from  care  as  the  birds  or  the 
unconscious  wild  flowers !  Those  who  are  incessantly 
distracted  by  secular  solicitudes  may  more  than   doubt 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  215 

whether  any  such  men  ever  existed.  One  at  least  did, 
even  Jesus.  And  He  has  had  genuine  followers ;  pro- 
bably many  more  than  we  know  of.  And  such,  wherever 
they  are,  are  sons  of  God  indeed,  who  by  faith  make 
their  lives  sublime,  and  in  the  spirit  of  Christian  optimism 
say  :  "  If  God  be  for  us,  who  can  be  against  us  ?  "  "  All 
things  work  together  for  good  to  them  that  love  God ; " 
"  at  the  heart  of  this  universe  is  One  whose  name  is  Love, 
and  nothing  in  the  universe  can  harm  me." 

The  third  element  of  filial  righteousness  is  fellowship 
with  God.  Such  fellowship  as  Jesus  enjoyed  is  in 
measure  possible  for  all  Christians.  He  came  into  the 
world  for  the  very  purpose  of  making  it  a  common  good. 
It  is  part  of  the  objective  significance  of  the  Christian 
era  that  it  has  abolished  the  distant  relations  between 
God  and  men  characteristic  of  the  old  era,  and  introduced 
relations  of  a  more  familiar  and  intimate  nature.  And 
it  is  the  duty  of  each  individual  Christian  to  realize  the 
change  subjectively.  This  the  spirit  of  son  ship  does. 
It  draws  near  to  God  with  true  heart  and  full  assurance 
of  faith.  The_legaLspirit,  on  the  contrary,  stands  afar 
off.  It  is  content  to  fear,  and  aspires  not  to  filial  fellow- 
ship. It  must  have  a  veil  between  it  and  the  Holy 
One ;  if  the  veil  that  could  in  its  time  claim  for  itself 
to  be  divinely  appointed  be  removed  or  rent  asunder  by 
the  advent  of  Christ,  it  will  weave  one  for  itself.  It  has 
been  weaving  a  veil  all  through  the  Christian  centuries, 
of  varying  material ;  before  the  Preformation,  of  priest- 
craft and  sacramentalism ;  since  then  in  the  Protestant 
world,  of  orthodox  opinions  and  time-honoured  religious 
custom.     Judaism  dies  hard,  and  Piabbinism  is  prone  to 


216  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

reappear  in  new  forms ;  therefore  it  is  not  enough  to  be 
objectively  redeemed  once  for  all :  redemption  from 
legalism  must  be  wrought  out  in  each  generation,  and 
in  each  individual  heart.  We  to  -  day  need  to  be 
redeemed,  not  less  than  the  Jewish  contemporaries  of 
Jesus,  from  a  vain  religious  conversation  received  by 
tradition  from  the  fathers.  The  legal  spirit  resists  the 
process,  which  threatens  to  rob  it  of  the  veil  between  it 
and  God  without  which  it  does  not  feel  comfortable. 
The  spirit  of  adoption,  on  the  other  hand,  eagerly  assists, 
lending  a  hand  to  tear  asunder  the  God  -  concealing 
screens  that  it  may  get  into  the  Father's  very  presence, 
and  doing  its  best  to  keep  the  king's  highway  open  for 
all  wayfarers  to  the  Father's  house  on  high.  This  part 
of  filial  righteousness  may  seem  to  be  a  purely  religious 
virtue  in  which  no  one  has  any  concern  but  the  individual 
Christian.  In  reality  it  has  most  important  bearings 
on  morals,  and  very  closely  concerns  the  wellbeing  of 
society.  It  is  not  good  in  any  view  that  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  scribes  should  reappear  and  gain  the  ascend- 
ency, and  the  only  guarantee  against  so  undesirable  an 
occurrence  is  the  prevalence  of  the  spirit  of  sonship,  as  a 
spirit  of  direct  personal,  joyful  communion  with  Heaven, 
without  the  mediation  of  either  priest  or  Eabbi. 

The  last  element  of  filial  righteousness  is  spiritual 
liberty  or  independence,  a  virtue  closely  related  to  the 
foregoing,  and  already  in  part  referred  to.  The  signi- 
ficance of  this  attribute  in  the  character  of  Christ  has 
been  indicated  in  a  previous  chapter.  It  remains  now 
to  add  that  it  has  similar  significance  in  the  character  of 
the   Christian.      It    imports   a    self-reliant  attitude    in 


THE  EIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  217 

reference  to  the  world,  religious  as  well  as  irreligious. 
The  son  of  God  is  not  dependent  on  public  opinion  for 
his  knowledge  of  truth.  He  has  an  anointing  of  the 
Spirit  of  truth  which  makes  him  feel  sure  he  is  in  the 
right  path  when  a  thousand  voices  declare  he  is  in  the 
wrong.  He  is  not  in  the  slippery,  insecure  position  of 
those  who  know  of  no  guide  in  religion,  and  to  a  certain 
extent  even  in  morals,  but  custom,  and  the  oracular 
utterances  of  men  who  make  confident  assertions,  or  who 
pass  in  the  world  for  wise.  He  stands  firm  on  the  rock 
of  personal  conviction.  Jesus  indicated  this  as  the 
desirable  and  normal  state  of  mind  when  He  described 
the  people  among  whom  He  lived  as  a  community  of 
blind  men,  the  majority  being  blindly  led  by  a  class  of 
persons  as  blind  as  themselves."^  What  He  desiderated 
was  that  men  should  know  for  themselves  what  was 
true  and  what  false  in  religion.  He  regarded  this  as 
possible  for  all  whose  hearts  were  right.  And  He  care- 
fully trained  His  own  disciples  to  regard  independent 
thought  and  action  as  a  duty,  by  accustoming  them  to  do 
many  things  which  were  witnessed  with  pious  horror  by 
the  abject  slaves  of  custom. 

The  last  observation  conducts  us  by  an  easy  transition 
to  the  fourth  aspect  of  the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom, 
according  to  which  it  consists  in  the  imitation  of  Christ. 
This  is  the  righteousness  of  discijjlesJiip.  In  the 
Sermon  on  the  Mount,  Jesus  did  not  directly  adopt  the 
style  of  one  who  summed  up  duty  in  likeness  to  Himself. 
He  exhorted  His  hearers  to  be  perfect  as  their  Father  in 
heaven  was  perfect.  Even  in  the  text  in  which  He 
1  Matt.  XV.  14. 


218  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

describes  spurious  disciples  as  calling  Him  Lord  at  the 
judgment,  He  makes  their  fate  turn  not  on  the  question 
whether  they  have  done  His  will,  but  on  the  question 
whether  they  have  done  the  will  of  His  Father  in 
heaven.^  In  the  epilogue  He  represented  hearers  as  wise 
or  foolish  according  as  they  heard  and  did  His  sayings,  or 
only  heard  without  doing.^  But  thereby  He  only  showed 
His  perfect  confidence  as  a  religious  teacher  in  the  truth 
and  vital  importance  of  His  doctrine.  He  took  up  a 
somewhat  higher  position  when,  at  a  later  period,  He 
claimed  to  be  the  exclusive  organ  of  the  revelation  of 
the  Father,  and  invited  men  to  come  and  learn  from 
Him.^  Even  then  His  claim  formally  was  to  be  the 
supreme  religious  guide  rather  than  the  living  law  of 
life.  "  Learn  from  Me  "  signifies  strictly,  not  take  Me 
as  an  example,  but  take  Me  as  the  one  great  Master. 
But  in  the  case  of  Jesus  the  latter  claim  includes  the 
former.  For  He  taught  not  by  word  only,  but  also  and 
even  more  by  action ;  and  when  by  word,  often  by 
accompanying  illustrative  action.  So,  for  example,  in 
relation  to  the  subjects  of  fasting,  ritual  ablutions, 
Sabbath -keeping,  intercourse  with  social  outcasts.  So 
likewise  in  relation  to  the  temper  becoming  disciples. 
Jesus  taught  His  disciples  to  be  humble  by  being  Him- 
self meek  and  lowly,  and  on  suitable  occasions  He  ex- 
pressly invited  them  to  take  note  of  His  behaviour  with  a 
disciplinary  purpose.^ 

Learning  from  Christ  thus  virtually  signifies  imitating 
Christ.     This  imitation   has  a  very  wide  range,   covers 

1  Matt.  vii.  21.  2  ^jatt.  vii.  24-27. 

4  Matt.  XX.  28. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  219 

indeed  the  whole  ground  of  Christian  duty.  Jesus  was 
a  model  in  all  things :  in  philanthropy,  in  sonship,  in 
devotion  to  the  kingdom,  in  temper.  The  following 
points,  however,  may  here  be  specially  mentioned.  It 
behoves  the  Christian  disciple  to  imitate  the  Master  in 
His  sympathies  with  the  objects  of  pity,  the  poor,  the 
sorrowful,  the  sinful ;  in  His  antipafJiies  against  the 
religious  vices  of  Pharisaism ;  in  His  lowliness ;  and  in 
His  heroic  devotion  to  duty  at  whatever  cost  of  self- 
sacrifice.  These  four  things  stand  out  most  prominently 
in  the  public  ministry  of  Jesus.  He  was  emphatically  a 
philanthropist,  a  lover  of  men,  a  friend  of  such  as  most 
needed  a  friend ;  and  no  one  can  be  a  good  Christian  in 
whom  the  spirit  of  pity  does  not  reign.  He  was  not 
less  emphatically  a  hater  of  all  counterfeit  sanctities. 
Nor  were  these  anti  -  pharisaic  antipathies  of  Jesus 
accidental :  they  formed  an  essential  part  of  the  religion 
He  preached  and  practised.  They  cannot  be  regarded  as 
now  merely  historical ;  they  must  be  repeated  in  every 
generation.  For  the  spirit  of  Pharisaism  lives  on 
through  the  ages,  ever  embodying  itself  in  new  forms, 
and  growing  like  a  fungus  on  every  manifestation  of 
the  divine  in  human  life,  not  excepting  evangelic  religion 
itself,  which  might  be  supposed  to  be  its  natural 
antithesis.  The  protest  of  the  Founder  of  our  faith  did 
not  slay  the  evil  thing;  it  only  clearly  revealed  its 
nature,  and  made  manifest  to  the  whole  world  that 
Christianity  and  it  have  nothing  in  common.  Therefore 
the  protest  needs  to  be  constantly  renewed,  and  every 
sincere  Christian  will  do  his  utmost  to  make  it  as 
effectual  as  possible  for  the  benefit  of  the  time  in  which 


220  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

he  lives.  No  Christian  worthy  of  the  name  will  be 
ashamed  of  the  antipathies  of  Jesus,  or  think  it  necessary 
to  apologise  for  them  or  to  throw  them  into  the  shade. 
He  will  rather  take  pains  to  evince  his  cordial  sympathy 
with  them  that  the  world  may  not  be  misled  into  the 
deplorable  mistake  of  confounding  the  piety  of  the  scribes 
with  the  Christianity  of  Christ,  and  that  those  may  be 
brought  to  Christ's  school  whose  present  religious  position 
is  merely  negative,  and  whose  only  creed  is  utter  dis- 
belief in  the  type  of  religion  which  Christ  so  unreservedly 
condemned.  A  religious  community  which,  while  bearing 
Christ's  name,  leaves  its  attitude  at  this  point  in  doubt, 
or,  still  worse,  gives  good  reasons  to  suspect  that  its 
sympathies  are  on  the  wrong  side,  is  a  salt  without  a 
savour,  and  sooner  or  later  will  be  trodden  under  foot  of 
men. 

On  the  other  attributes  of  Jesus  above  mentioned  it  is 
not  necessary  to  expatiate.  However  rare  the  spirit  of 
lowliness  may  be,  all  acknowledge  that  it  was  conspicuous 
in  His  character,  and  that  in  this  very  specially  He  is 
to  be  regarded  as  our  example.  The  greatest  in  the 
kingdom  in  a  spirit  of  lowly  love  became  the  least.  He 
was  among  His  own  disciples  as  the  serving  man.  He 
held  Himself  up  as  a  pattern  in  this  respect  to  His 
disciples  when  in  a  spirit  of  ambition  they  disputed 
about  places  of  distinction,  and  taught  them  the  great 
truth,  that  honour  in  the  kingdom  of  God  comes  by 
service.^  Thereby  He  proclaimed  one  of  the  most 
characteristic  laws  of  that  kingdom,  and  indicated  one  of 
the  most  essential  elements  in  its  righteousness.  No 
1  Matt.  XX.  27,  28. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  221 

one  has  any  part  in  the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom  or 
any  fellowship  of  life  with  Christ  who  does  not  loyally 
accept  this  law  of  greatness  by  service.  Of  Christ's 
heroic  devotion  to  duty  there  is  also  no  room  to  doubt, 
nor  has  He  neglected  to  instruct  His  disciples  that  in 
this  virtue  He  expects  them  to  follow  in  His  footsteps. 
The  precept,  "  deny  thyself,"  is  one  of  the  commonplaces 
in  the  doctrine  of  Jesus.  In  various  forms  of  language 
and-  on  several  occasions  He  said  :  "  Whosoever  does  not 
bear  his  cross  and  come  after  Me,  he  cannot  be  My 
disciple."  ^  He  even  went  so  far  as  to  prescribe  hatred  of 
the  most  dearly  loved  objects  of  affection  as  a  qualification 
for  true  discipleship.^  This  is  one  of  the  sayings  of 
our  Lord  which  must  be  taken  in  the  spirit  and  not  in 
the  letter.  It  presupposes  the  existence  of  the  opposite 
affection  to  that  enjoined,  and  requires  disciples  to  subor- 
dinate the  love  of  kindred  and  life  to  the  duties  of  their 
spiritual  calling,  repressing  all  softheartedness  as  passion- 
ately as  if  they  hated  what  in  truth  they  intensely  love. 
We  come  now,  in  the  last  place,  to  the  righteousness 
of  citizenship.  The  cardinal  virtue  here  also  is  absolute 
devotion.  The  complete  self-surrender  which  Jesus  in 
such  strong  terms  demanded  from  disciples  towards  Him- 
self, He  also  demanded  towards  the  kingdom  of  God 
from  all  citizens.  The  two  demands  indeed  are  sub- 
stantially one,  for  the  interests  of  the  kingdom  and  the 
service  of  the  King  practically  coincide.     The  ground  of 

1  Luke  xiv.  27. 

2  Luke  xiv.  26.  On  tins  saying  as  given  by  Luke  vide  Introduc- 
tion, p.  19.  Even  in  this  strong  form  it  might  have  been  spoken  by 
Christ. 


222  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  demand  is  that  the  kingdom  is  the  chief  good,  and 
the  chief  end.  It  is  represented  as  the  chief  good  in  the 
parables  of  The  Treasure  hid  in  a  Field,  and  The  Pearl  of 
Great  Priced  in  both  of  which  it  is  taught  that  the  king- 
dom of  heaven  is  of  incomparable  worth,  so  that  a  man 
who  knows  its  true  value  will  joyfully  sacrifice  all  he 
hath  for  its  sake.  It  is  implied  in  the  same  parables 
that  a  man  may  reasonably  be  expected  to  make  this 
sacrifice,  because  the  kingdom  is  the  chief  end.  What  is 
there  implied  is  in  other  texts  expressly  declared.  No- 
w^here  do  we  find  the  sovereign  claims  of  the  kingdom 
expressed  in  more  peremptory  terms  than  in  two  sayings 
reported  by  the  third  evangelist :  "  Let  the  dead  bury 
their  dead,  but  go  thou  and  preach  the  kingdom  of  God;" 
"  No  man,  having  put  his  hand  to  the  plough,  and  looking 
back,  is  fit  for  the  kingdom  of  God," ' — the  one  spoken 
to  a  disciple  who  wished  to  bury  his  father  before  entering 
on  the  duties  to  which  the  Master  summoned  him,  the 
other  to  a  disciple  who  desired  permission  to  go  and  bid 
farewell  to  his  friends.  The  reply  in  either  case  was  a 
refusal,  and  the  terms  in  which  it  w^as  expressed  in  both 
instances  seem  harsh  and  unreasonable.  It  does  seem 
hard  that  a  man  enlisted  for  service  in  the  kingdom  can- 
not get  leave  to  go  home  to  pay  the  last  duty  to  a  parent, 
and  little  less  hard  that  one  cannot  speak  of  bidding 
friends  good-bye  without  incurring  the  suspicion  of  half- 
heartedness.  But  the  very  harshness  and  apparent 
unreasonableness  of  the  sayings  serve  to  show  how 
exacting  and  inexorable  is  the  demand  of  the  kingdom 
for  heroic  devotion ;  and  when  we  carefully  consider 
1  Matt.  xiii.  44-46.  2  L^ke  ix.  60,  62. 


THE  EIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  223 

the  words,  we  see  that  they  convey  that  idea  iu  terms 
whichy*  under  a  superficial  appearance  of  extravagance, 
conceal  principles  on  which  Jesus  seriously  meant  all 
disciples  to  act.  Each  of  the  three  sayings,  brought 
together  by  Luke  in  the  place  from  which  the  above  two 
are  quoted,  contains  a  distinct  principle  applicable  to  a 
particular  type  of  character.  The  word  spoken  to  the 
scribe :  "  Foxes  have  holes,  and  birds  of  the  air  have 
nests ;  but  the  Son  of  Man  hath  not  where  to  lay  His 
head,"  suggested  to  an  inconsiderate  enthusiast  the  lesson 
that  one  must  count  the  cost  before  entering  on  the 
career  of  a  disciple.  The  second  word  is  adapted  to  the 
case  of  a  man  thoroughly  in  earnest,  but  distracted  by  a 
conflict  of  duties,  and  virtually  enunciates  the  principle 
that  in  all  collisions  between  the  duties  we  owe  to  the 
kingdom  and  those  arising  out  of  natural  relations,  the 
former  must  take  precedence.  The  third  word  meets  the 
case  of  a  divided  heart.  The  ploughman  who  looks  back 
does  not  give  his  undivided  attention  to  his  task,  and 
therefore  fails  to  drive  a  straight  furrow.  The  man  who 
desired  to  bid  farewell  to  his  friends  was  hankering  after 
home  enjoyments,  and  the  reply  to  his  request  taught  the 
lesson  that  no  one  who  is  drawn  two  ways  by  his  affec- 
tions is  fit  for  the  service  of  the  kingdom,  because  it 
demands  the  whole  heart  and  mind. 

While  pronouncing  the  man  of  divided  heart  unfit, 
Jesus  reckoned  the  man  who  served  the  kingdom  with 
singleness  of  heart  perfect.  It  was  in  this  sense  He  used 
the  term  when  He  said  to  the  young  ruler :  "  If  thou  wilt 
be  perfect,  go  and  sell  that  thou  hast."  ■^  There  are  two 
1  Matt.  xix.  21. 


224  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

senses  in  which  we  may  speak  of  perfection.     There  is  a 
perfection    of    motive,    which    is    equivalent    to   single- 
mindedness ;  and  there  is  a  perfection  in  conduct,  free- 
dom from  fault  in  all  parts  of  character.     Both  sorts  of 
perfection    are   to   be  desired,  and  are  possible  here  or 
hereafter.     But  when  men  are  spoken   of  in  Scripture 
as  actually  perfect,  while  still  living  in  this  world,  the 
word  is  used  in  the  first  sense,  not  in  the  second.     Noah 
and  Job  are  called  perfect  in  this  sense,^  and  could  not  be 
in  any  other,  for  they  were  both  faulty.     Caleb  and  David 
are  virtually  described  as  perfect  in  this  sense  when  they 
are  said  to  have  followed  God  fully  or  with  all  the  heart,^ 
and  they  deserved  the  praise,  while  David  at  least  could 
not  be  characterized  as  perfect  in  the  sense  of  faultless- 
ness.     Keeping  in  mind  this  distinction,  we  can  under- 
stand how  Paul  could  speak  of  himself  as  at  once  perfect 
and  imperfect,  as  when  he  said,  "  Not  that  I  have  already 
attained  or  am  already  perfected,"  ^  and  immediately  after 
referred  to  a  class  called  the  reXecoc  which  included  himself. 
In  Paul's  judgment  the  reXeioL  possessed  two  attributes 
— aspiration,  implying  a  consciousness  of  yet  unreached 
moral  attainments,  and  single-mindedness,  having  for  its 
motto :  ev  Se, — one  idea,  one  aim  filling  the  whole  mind. 
Such  was  the  perfection  Jesus  demanded  of  the  young 
ruler,  and  of  all  who  undertook  the  responsibilities  of 
citizenship  in  the  divine  kingdom.     He  did  not  require 
or  expect  perfection  in  the  details  of  conduct,  but  He  did 
demand  a  perfect  heart.     It  was  to  this  He  pointed  when 
He   said,  "Go  and  sell  that  thou  hast."      He  did  not 

1  Gen.  vi.  9  ;  Job  i.  1.  "  Num.  xiv.  24  ;  2  Kings  xiv.  8. 

3  Phil.  iii.  14-16. 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  225 

mean :  "  You  have  many  virtues,  it  would  seem,  add  yet 
one  more — the  renunciation  of  property,  and  then  you 
will  be  a  perfect  man,  a  paragon  of  excellence  without  a 
single  defect."  ISTot  one  act  or  virtue  more  is  exacted, 
but  a  state  of  heart,  the  presence  or  absence  of  which  will 
be  ascertained  by  the  manner  in  which  the  advice  is 
taken.  Can  the  aspirant  part  with  all,  then  he  is  perfect 
in  the  sense  of  caring  supremely  for  the  knigdom  of  God. 
Can  he  not  part  with  his  possessions,  then  his  interest  in 
eternal  life  or  the  divine  kingdom  is  not  a  consuming 
passion,  but  simply  one  of  many  inclinations,  and  not  the 
strongest.  He  is  what  St.  James  calls  avrjp  S/^/tl'^^o?,^ 
a  two-souled  man,  with  one  soul  loving  the  world 
dearly,  and  another  loving  somewhat,  but  not  enough, 
the  kingdom  of  heaven.  Such  two-mindedness  Jesus 
looked  on  as  a  fatal  defect.  In  His  view  the  perfec- 
tion of  single  -  mindedness  was  not  merely  a  desirable 
ornament,  but  an  indispensable  requisite  of  genuine 
citizenship. 

The  man  of  perfect  heart  is  never  self-complacent ;  he 
serves  God  devotedly  yet  humbly.  This  truth  Jesus 
taught  in  the  parable  of  Extra  Service^  which  depicts  a 
labourer  returning  from  the  fields  in  the  evening,  weary 
and  hungry,  yet  called  on  to  serve  his  master  at  supper, 
before  he  can  himself  sit  down  to  meat  and  rest.  The 
parable  conveys  two  lessons :  one,  that  the  service  of  the 
kingdom  is  of  a  very  exacting  nature,  recognising  no 
day's  work  of  statutory  length,  and  often  summoning  to 
extra  tasks  a  servant  who  has  already  toiled  many  hours ; 
the  other,  that  the  right-minded  servant  will  perform 
1  Jas.  1.  8.  2  L^i^e  xvii.  7-10. 

P 


226  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

these  added  tasks  without  a  murmur,  and  without  a 
thought  that  anything  great  or  specially  meritorious 
has  been  done  by  him.  The  temper  equal  to  this  is 
manifestly  not  that  either  of  the  slave  who  works  as  a 
drudge  under  compulsion,  or  of  the  Pharisee  who  sets 
a  high  value  on  his  performance.  It  is  the  temper  of 
devotion  mellowed  by  the  grace  of  humility. 

Incapable  of  mean-minded  self-satisfaction,  the  devoted 
man  is  still  less  capable  of  mercenariness.  He  serves 
generously  in  obedience  to  the  impulses  of  a  heart 
which  loves  the  kingdom  for  its  own  sake,  not  for  "hire. 
Generosity  enters  as  an  essential  ingredient  into  the 
righteousness  of  citizenship.  This  Jesus  taught  in  the 
parable  of  The  Labourers  in  the  Vineyard}  The  praise 
of  generosity  is  not  expressed  indeed,  but  it  is  implied 
in  the  preference  of  the  employer  for  those  who  entered 
at  the  eleventh  hour,  and  worked  without  making  a 
bargain, — a  preference  shown  by  paying  them  first,  and 
by  paying  them  a  full  day's  hire.  If  the  occasion  of  the 
parable  was  Peter's  question,  "  We  have  left  all,  and 
followed  Thee,  what  shall  we  have  therefore  ? "  the 
purpose  to  discourage  a  mercenary  spirit  becomes  still 
more  certain. 

I  close  this  exposition  of  the  righteousness  of  the 
kingdom  by  three  general  observations. 

1.  In  that  righteousness  as  here  exhibited  religion 
and  morality  are  blended.  This  is  as  it  ought  to  be. 
Eeligion  and  morals  may  be  separated  in  natural  ethics, 
but  not  in  the  ethics  of  Christianity,  which  embrace  the 
whole  of  human  conduct  under  all  aspects  and  relations. 
1  Matt.  XX.  1-16. 


THE  KIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  227 

The  counterfeit  righteousness  of  the  scribes  was  also  of 
this  composite  character.  Hence  in  the  Sermon  on  the 
Mount  the  term  BiKacoavvr]  is  used  in  reference  to  such 
matters  as  almsgiving,  praying,  and  fasting, — all  three 
more  or  less  of  a  religious  character.  "  Take  heed,"  said 
the  Preacher,  "  that  ye  do  not  your  righteousness  before 
men,  to  be  seen  of  them  ; "  ^  proceeding  thereafter  to 
illustrate  the  counsel  by  describing  the  ostentatious 
manner  in  which  the  Pharisees  performed  the  duties 
above  specified. 

2.  It  will  have  been  observed  that  the  diverse  aspects 
under  which  the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom  has  been 
presented  to  a  considerable  extent  overlap  each  other. 
This  may  appear  a  fault  of  method,  but  it  is  a  fault 
which  cannot  well  be  avoided.  This  righteousness  is  a 
many-sided  thing ;  it  is  like  a  rich  landscape  to  which 
justice  cannot  be  done  by  a  single  painting  taken  from 
one  point  of  \'iew.  Many  pictures  are  needed  to  present 
it  in  its  manifoldness  before  the  mental  eye ;  and  though 
the  same  features  appear  more  or  less  in  all,  they  are 
shown  in  different  relations  and  in  varying  proportions. 
The  remark  applies  not  only  to  Christ's  doctrine  of 
righteousness,  but  to  many  other  parts  of  His  teaching. 
His  great  words  baffle  all  attempts  at  exhaustive  treat- 
ment by  a  single  train,  of  thought. 

3.  The  righteousness  of  God,  here  imperfectly  de- 
scribed,  may  seem  high   and    difficult   to   fulfil.     It   is 

1  Matt.  vi.  1.  For  liKoaoavu^u  tke  T.  K.  has  kT^mf^oavmv,  a  reading 
due  to  tlie  feeling  that  the  term  righteousness  was  not  applicable 
to  such  matters  as  those  afterwards  referred  to,  or  to  almsgiving 
in  particular.  npH^  (righteousness)  was  a  current  name  for  alms 
among  the  scribes.     Vide  Weber,  p.  276. 


228  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

indeed  high,  like  the  great  mountains/  whose  snowy- 
summits  it  is  not  easy  to  reach.  But  the  command- 
ments of  Christ,  though  difficult,  are  not  grievous.  Laws 
are  grievous  which  are  merely  positive  or  ritual  in  their 
character,  having  no  apparent  reason  for  their  observance 
beyond  the  arbitrary  will  of  the  legislator.  Such  for  the 
most  part  were  the  commandments  of  the  scribes.  Even 
moral  laws,  such  as  commend  themselves  to  conscience, 
become  grievous  when  they  are  enforced  mainly  by 
threatened  penalties  appealing  to  fear.  Christ's  com- 
mands are  not  grievous  in  either  respect.  They  are 
essentially  spiritual,  and  as  such  self-evidently  reason- 
able. What  more  reasonable  than  the  requirement  to 
be  God-like  in  charity,  Christ-like  in  meekness  and  in 
fidelity  to  duty,  or  to  be  a  true  son  of  God  in  spirit  ? 
These  precepts  simply  present,  in  the  form  of  a  task, 
that  which  our  own  spiritual  intelligence  recognises  as 
the  moral  ideal.  The  ideal  is  high,  but  an  ideal  is 
never  burdensome  because  it  is  high ;  on  the  contrary, 
it  is  the  low  moral  ideal  that  is  felt  to  be  burdensome. 
How  intolerable,  for  example,  were  the  model  prescribed 
not  the  loving  Father  in  heaven,  but  the  immoral 
divinities  of  paganism !  If  there  be  nothing  grievous 
in  the  nature  of  the  commandments,  as  little  is  there 
in  the  motives  on  which  reliance  is  placed  to  ensure 
obedience.  For  these  consist  not  in  intimidations,  like 
those  brought  into  play  at  Sinai,  but  in  aspirations  and 
inspirations.  The  divine  ideal  is  exhibited,  and  is  left 
to  draw  us  towards  itself  by  its  own  unearthly  beauty. 
A  perfect  example  is  set  before  us,  and  its  power 
^  Ps.  xxxvi.  6,  "  Thy  righteousness  is  like  the  great  mountains." 


THE  RIGHTEOUSNESS  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  229 

to  awaken  enthusiasm  is  confidently  relied  on.  The 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom  acts  on  us  as  the  moun- 
tain peaks  on  the  strong-limbed  climber,  or  the  model 
picture  of  a  great  master  on  the  young  artist.  In  either 
case  a  hard  task  is  set,  but  the  very  arduousness  is  a 
part  of  the  charm.  To  catch  the  spirit  of  the  old 
masters  is  the  aspirant's  own  ambition.  Scaling  the 
high  Alps  is  the  tourist's  holiday  work.  Even  so  is  it 
the  delight  of  the  disciple  to  do  the  will  of  the  Father, 
and  to  follow  in  the  footsteps  of  Christ.  Who  would 
not  rather  ascend  the  high  hills  of  God  in  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  than  walk  the  treadmill  in  the  prison-house 
of  Eabbinism ! 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE. 

According  to  the  united  testimony  of  the  Synoptical 
Evangelists,  Jesus  for  the  first  time  spoke  plainly  to  His 
disciples  concerning  the  fact  and  the  manner  of  His 
death,  towards  the  close  of  the  Galilean  ministry,  on  the 
visit  to  the  neighbourhood  of  Cffisarea  Philippi.  Then 
"  He  began  to  teach  them  that  the  Son  of  Man  must 
suffer  many  things,  and  be  rejected  of  the  elders,  and  of 
the  chief  priests  and  scribes,  and  be  killed."  ^  Thereafter 
He  repeated  the  startling  intimation  with  added  par- 
ticulars, from  time  to  time  as  His  own  mood  or  outward 
circumstances  prompted.^  Up  till  then  He  had  alluded 
to  the  tragic  issue  of  His  life  only  in  vague,  mystic  terms, 
as  when  He  hinted  that  days  would  come  when  the 
Bridegroom  should  be  taken  away  and  the  children  of 
the  bridechamber  should  have  cause  to  mourn.^ 

In  introducing  the  approaching  passion  as  a  subject  of 
explicit  prediction,  in  familiar  intercourse  with  His  dis- 
ciples, Jesus  deemed  it  expedient  also  to  begin  to  instruct 
them  as  to  its  cause  and  meaning,  that  the  unwelcome 
event  might  be  rendered  more  tolerable  by  insight  into  its 
1  Mark  viii.  31.  2  Matt.  xvii.  22,  xx.  IV.  ^  Matt.  ix.  15. 

230 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.         231 

rationale.  From  the  view-point  of  an  elaborate  theology 
the  instruction  He  communicated  may  appear  very 
meagre,  consisting  at  most  of  four  lessons  conveyed  in 
very  brief  sayings.  But  instead  of  indulging  in  idle 
regrets  that  more  was  not  spoken  or  recorded  on  so  vitally 
important  a  topic,  let  us  endeavour  to  penetrate  into  the 
meaning  of  the  few  precious  words  which  embody  our 
Lord's  doctrine  of  the  cross. 

The  Jirst  lesson  Jesus  taught  His  disciples  in  this 
abstruse  doctrine  w^as,  that  His  death  was  the  natural 
effect  of  fidelity  to  righteousness  in  an  unrighteous  world. 
Such  is  the  import  of  the  words  He  spoke  to  Peter  in 
rebuke  of  his  counsel  of  self-preservation  :  "  Thou  savourest 
not  the  things  that  be  of  God,  but  those  that  be  of  men."  ^ 
It  is  implied  that  the  divine  interest  and  the  individual 
human  interest  are  to  a  certain  extent  incompatible,  so 
that  a  choice  must  be  made  between  them,  and  that  the 
path  of  duty,  in  all  cases  of  collision,  is  to  sacrifice  the 
personal  interest  to  the  divine.  On  this  view  the  suf- 
ferings of  Christ  are  not  to  be  regarded  as  singular  or 
exceptional,  at  least  in  kind,  but  rather  as  the  highest 
instance  of  a  general  law,  according  to  which  all  who  are 
loyal  to  the  di\dne  claims  must  more  or  less  suffer  for 
righteousness'  sake.  This  accordingly  Jesus  proceeded 
immediately  to  declare  in  these  terms  :  "  If , any  man  will 
come  after  Me,  let  him  deny  himself,  and  take  up  his 
cross,  and  follow  Me."  ^  Thereby  He  intimated  that 
cross-bearing  was  the  normal  law  of  every  life  regulated 
by  supreme  devotion  to  the  divine  kingdom ;  or,  in  other 
words,  that  the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom  was  so 
1  Matt.  xvi.  23.  -'  ^att.  xvi.  24. 


232  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

utterly  diverse  from  the  way  of  the  world,  that  reaction 
against  it  might  be  reckoned  on  as  certain. 

In  the  case  of  Jesus  Himself  the  truth  of  this  hard 
doctrine  is  apparent.  Simply  by  being  righteous  in  the 
true  sense  of  the  word,  He  exposed  Himself  to  a  deadly 
opposition  which  naturally  culminated  in  His  crucifixion. 
Three  features  of  His  public  conduct,  closely  connected, 
inevitably  provoked  the  bitter  hostility  of  the  religious 
world,  above  all  things  to  be  feared.  These  were  His 
unflinching  exposure  of  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes ; 
His  habit  of  fraternizing  with  the  people  of  the  land.  Am 
Haarez,  who  neither  knew  nor  kept  the  laws  manufac- 
tured by  the  scribes  ;  and  His  personal  disregard  of  many 
Eabbinical  prescriptions,  such  as  those  connected  with 
fasting,  ritual  ablutions,  and  Sabbath  keeping.  These 
characteristics,  early  manifested  and  early  noticed,  indi- 
cated a  complete  breach  with  Pharisaism,  which  to  the 
lynx-eyed  suspicious  spirit  of  religious  conservatism  must 
have  appeared  a  thing  of  evil  omen,  portending,  in  fact, 
nothing  less  than  a  revolution,  a  catastrophe  by  all  means 
fair  or  foul  to  be  averted.  In  all  the  three  lines  of 
action  Jesus  was  but  putting  in  practice  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  kingdom  :  in  the  first,  witnessing  for  truth 
against  current  plausible  falsehood ;  in  the  second,  loving 
those  whom  cruel  caste-pride  abandoned  to  neglect  and 
did  its  best  to  ruin ;  in  the  third,  backing  up  a  protest 
in  words  by  a  more  powerful  protest  in  deeds,  and  refus- 
ing to  lend  the  sanction  of  His  examj)le  to  a  moral 
system  in  which  virtues  and  sins  were  alike  artificial. 
Yet  against  such  truth,  love,  and  sincerity,  genuine  ele- 
ments of  the  righteousness  of  God,  there  was  a  law :  the 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        233 

law  of  established  custom,  which  would  not  suffer  itself 
to  be  broken  with  impunity.  This  law  made  its  voice 
very  soon  heard,  in  censure  of  Christ's  nonconforming 
ways ;  the  tone  of  condemnation  increasing  in  emphasis 
and  truculence  as  time  went  on,  till  at  last  it  became 
brutal  and  murderous.  Jesus  knew  well  what  the  voice 
meant,  even  in  its  first  mutterings  of  discontent.  Pro- 
bably He  did  not  need  to  wait  for  open  manifestations  of 
the  spirit  of  antagonism  in  order  to  know  what  lay  before 
Him.  He  could  divine  His  fate  from  the  treatment 
experienced  by  the  prophets,^  and  through  clear  insight 
into  the  deep  irreconcilable  contrariety  between  the 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom  and  that  of  the  scribes. 
Hence  apparently  trivial  occurrences  were  fraught  with 
ominous  import  to  His  mind ;  in  a  small  cloud  like  a 
man's  hand  He  could  discern  the  signs  of  a  coming  storm. 
The  question,  "  Why  do  Thy  disciples  fast  not  ? "  which 
to  any  other  person  might  seem  very  innocent  and  peace- 
able, led  Him  to  speak  of  days  when  His  bereaved 
disciples  would  have  good  cause  to  fast,  the  thought 
underlying  the  allusion  obviously  being :  "  at  the  end  of 
this  way  of  nonconformity  stands  a  cross."  ^  The  demand 
for  a  sign  from  heaven  made  by  the  Pharisees  at  a  later 
period,  by  a  logic  not  apparent  to  the  disciples,  awakened 
in  His  mind  the  most  gloomy  forebodings. 

It  was  a  mere  question  of  time  how  long  it  would  take 
Pharisaic  hostility  to  ripen  into  a  fixed  purpose  to  get  rid 
of  the  obnoxious  man  by  violence.  To  that  it  must  come 
sooner  or  later.  At  first  it  might  content  itself  with 
expressions  of  simple  disapprobation,  or  at  worst  with 
1  Matt.  V.  12,  xxiii.  29-31,  37.        ^  Matt.  ix.  15.        »  Matt.  xvi.  1-4. 


234  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

slanderous  misrepresentations ;  but  if  these  means  failed 
it  would  not  hesitate  to  have  recourse  to  more  effectual 
methods  of  neutralizing  the  offender's  influence.  That 
influence  was  too  great  to  be  treated  with  contempt. 
Jesus  was  formidable  by  His  miracles,  His  wisdom,  His 
goodness  secretly  acknowledged,  though  in  word  denied, 
by  the  claims  to  be  some  exceptionally  great  one  which 
all  these  suggested,  by  His  popularity  which,  though 
subject  to  fluctuation,  ever  broke  out  anew  like  an  epi- 
demic, so  that  no  one  could  tell  what  might  come  out 
of  it.  Such  indeed  was  the  favour  which  His  works  of 
healing,  His  teaching,  and  His  character  had  won  for  Him 
among  the  people,  that  had  He  chosen  to  use  it  as  an 
instrument  of  self-defence  He  might  have  set  Pharisees, 
priests,  scribes,  and  unprincipled  rulers  at  defiance.  He 
liad  only  to  flatter  popular  prejudices  and  yield  Himself 
up  to  patriotic  enthusiasms.  But  He  was  not  a  man  of 
the  world  who  could  play  off  one  party  against  another, 
or  make  friends  by  even  seeming  acquiescence  in  pre- 
valent delusions.  And  so  He  became  completely  isolated, 
a  man  without  a  party  on  whose  support  He  could  rely ; 
and  His  enemies  without  much  risk  might  do  unto  Him 
whatever  they  listed. 

It  thus  appears  that  the  sufferings  of  Jesus  followed 
in  the  way  of  natural  causality  from  the  faithful  discharge 
of  the  duties  of  His  prophetic  calling.  On  this  view  as 
a  foundation  all  higher  theological  constructions  of  the 
passion  must  rest.  Whatever  more  is  to  be  said  as  to 
the  significance  of  Christ's  death,  this  at  least  is  certain, 
that  He  died  as  a  faithful  martyr  for  truth  and  love. 
And  in  this  aspect  of  His  sufferings  He  is  not  isolated. 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.         235 

He  lias  companions  thus  far,  and  is  a  Captain  leading  a 
host  to  battle.  The  antagonism  between  the  divine 
kingdom  and  the  world,  though  not  always  so  acute  as 
in  the  experience  of  the  Saviour,  is  chronic,  and  there  is 
always  occasion  in  some  form  for  the  sacrifice  pointed 
at  in  the  striking  paradox :  "  Whosoever  will  save  his 
life  shall  lose  it ;  and  whosoever  will  lose  his  life  for  My 
sake  shall  find  it."^ 

The  second  lesson  in  the  doctrine  of  the  cross  was  given 
in  connection  with  the  ambitious  request  of  the  two  sons 
of  Zebedee,  on  which  occasion  Jesus  said :  "  The  Son  of 
Man  came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister, 
and  to  give  His  life  a  ransom  for  many."  ^  The  saying 
comes  in  with  startling  abruptness,  without  anything  in 
the  context  to  prepare  us  for  the  introduction  of  the  one 
remarkable  word  it  contains,  the  term  Xvrpou  (ransom). 
On  this  account,  and  also  because  of  the  aspect  of  theo- 
logical theorizing  on  the  subject  of  Christ's  death  which 
the  text  wears,  the  authenticity  of  this  logion  has  been 
called  in  question  by  Dr.  Baur  and  others.  The  solitari- 
ness of  the  utterance  has  also  been  pressed  into  the 
service  of  a  suspicious  criticism,  there  being  no  other 
text  in  the  Synoptical  records  the  least  like  it,  save  that 
occurring  in  the  account  of  the  institution  of  the  Supper, 
to  be  hereafter  noticed.  But  the  genuineness  of  this 
word  can  hardly  be  doubted  in  view  of  the  fact  that  it 
is  recorded  by  both  Matthew  and  Mark,  though  the 
absence  of  a  text  so  Pauline  in  character  from  Luke's 
narrative  is  certainly  surprising.  And,  if  we  leave  out 
of  account  the  one  word  Xvrpov,  the  relevancy  of  the 
1  Matt.  xvi.  25.  ^  ^^tt.  xx.  28  ;  Mark  x.  45. 


236  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

saying  to  the  connection  of  thought  is  indisputable.     The 
ambition  of  the  two  disciples  was  to  obtain  places  of 
distinction  in  the  Messianic  kingdom.     Jesus  gave  them 
and   their   fellow  -  disciples    to   understand    that   in   this 
kingdom  power  was  not  to  be  got  by  solicitation  or  by 
inheritance,  but  solely  by  service ;  he  being  the  greatest 
who   in  love   humbled   himself   to   be   the   least.     How 
natural  and  how  convincing  to  follow  up  the  statement 
of  this  general  principle  by  a  reference  to  the  conduct 
of  One  whom  the  disciples  regarded  as  the  King  of  this 
kingdom,  with  the  view  of  showing  how  He  sought  power. 
For  that  was  the  point  to  be  emphasized.      The  reference 
made  by  Jesus  to  His  own  manner  of  acting  was  not  meant 
to  exemplify  His  humility,  but  to  explain  His  method  of 
gaining  sovereignty.     "  The  Son  of  Man,"  He  says  in  effect, 
"  seeks  His  place,  that  of  sovereign,  not  by  self-assertion, 
not  by  demanding  His  rights  and  enforcing  them  with  a  high 
hand,  but  by  stooping  to  be  a  servant  to  His  own  future 
subjects,  carrying  service  to  the  limit  of  possibility,  even  to 
the  extent  of  laying  down  His  life  for  the  good  of  many." 
Thus  understood,  this  text,  omitting  the  term  Xvrpov, 
teaches  as  the  second  lesson  in  the  doctrine  of  the  cross, 
that  Jesus  died  not  merely  for  righteousness'  sake,  but 
for  the  benefit  of  men  whom  by  this  act  of  self-humbling 
love  He  sought  to  make  His  devoted  subjects.      But  the 
omitted  term  must  now  be  taken  into  account,  and  we 
must   inquire   what   is   to   be   understood   by  this   very 
peculiar  form  in  which  the  fact  of  the  passion  is  framed  ? 
A  priori  it  was  to  be  expected  that  Jesus  would  frame 
the  fact  in  some  remarkable  thought  forms.     After  He 
had  begun  to  think  much,  and  with  deep  emotion,  on  the 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        237 

fact  that  He  must  die  on  the  cross,  it  was  inevitable  that 
His  mind  should  set  itself  to  invest  the  harsh  prosaic 
fact  with  poetic,  mystic,  spiritual  meanings.  He  could 
not  be  content  to  regard  His  death  as  a  mere  fate :  He 
must  see  in  it  an  event  ordained  of  God  for  beneficent 
ends,  destined  to  prove  eventually  in  an  eminent  degree 
serviceable  to  the  kingdom,  instead  of  being,  as  might 
well  appear  to  be  the  case,  a  fatal  blow  to  its  prospects. 
This  much  we  should  expect,  even  if  we  regarded  Jesus 
only  as  a  man  of  wonderful  religious  genius.  From  such 
an  one,  as  even  Keim  admits,  some  deep  pregnant  utter- 
ances concerning  the  meaning  of  this  anticipated  death 
by  violence  were  to  be  looked  for,  comparing  it  to  redemp- 
tion money,  or  to  the  seal  of  a  new  covenant,  or  to  a  corn 
of  wheat  dying  that  it  may  become  fruitful — words  worthy 
of  one  whose  genius,  not  to  speak  of  anything  higher, 
was  able  to  cope  with  death,  and  rob  it  of  its  sting  and 
its  repulsiveness,  and  invest  it  with  beauty,  clothing  the 
unsightly  skeleton  of  rude  reality  with  the  flesh  and 
blood  of  spiritual  significance. 

This  thought  concerning  the  ransom,  which  comes  in 
so  abruptly  and  stands  so  isolated,  like  a  detached  rock 
which  has  resisted  successfully  the  disintegrating  force 
of  the  elements,  had  doubtless  a  secret  history  in  the 
mind  of  Jesus,  which,  if  known,  would  help  us  to  under- 
stand its  meaning.  In  absence  of  any  explanatory  state- 
ments by  the  speaker,  it  is  natural  to  seek  light  in  the 
Old  Testament,  and  to  regard  the  saying  as  the  result  of 
a  combination  of  texts  drawn  from  the  ancient  Scriptures. 
Thus  Eitschl  finds  the  roots  of  the  idea  in  these  two  texts  :  ^ 
"  None  of  them  can  by  any  means  redeem  his  brother, 


238  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

nor  give  to  God  a  ransom  for  him ; "  -^  and,  "  If  there 
be  a  messenger  with  him,  an  interpreter,  one  among  a 
thousand,  to  show  unto  man  his  uprightness :  then  he  is 
gracious  unto  him,  and  saith.  Deliver  him  from  going 
down  to  the  pit ;  I  have  found  a  ransom."  ^  From  the 
former  he  draws  the  two  inferences,  that  the  "  ransom  " 
is  a  gift  to  God,  not  to  the  devil,  and  that  Jesus  repre- 
sents Himself  as  able  to  render  a  service  in  the  place  of 
the  many  which  no  one  of  them  could  render  either  for 
himself  or  for  another.  From  the  latter  he  gathers  a 
third  inference,  viz.  that  Jesus  distinguishes  Himself 
from  the  mass  of  men  liable  to  death  as  being  exempted 
from  the  natural  doom  of  death,  and  conceives  of  His 
death  as  a  voluntary  act  by  which  He  surrenders  His 
life  to  God.  Assuming  that  these  thoughts  were  all 
present  to  the  speaker's  mind  when  he  uttered  the  saying 
now  under  consideration,  it  teaches  that  the  Son  of  Man 
gave  His  life  to  God  a  ransom  for  the  lives  of  men 
doomed  to  die,  which  He  was  able  to  do,  because  His  life 
was  that  of  an  exceptional  being,  one  among  a  thousand, 
not  a  brother  mortal,  but  an  angel  who  assumed  flesh, 
and  became  a  son  of  man  that  He  might  freely  die.^ 

This  construction,  while  exegetically  legitimate,  is  open 
to  the  objection  that  it  makes  the  saying  the  outcome  of 
a  process  of  reasoning  much  more  in  keeping  with  the 
habits  of  thought  characteristic  of  the  professional  theolo- 
gian than  with  the  genial  poetic  way  of  Jesus.  It  would 
be  more  satisfactory  if  we  could  connect  the  saying  with 
some   occurrence   in    the   recent   history  of   the   speaker 

1  Ps.  xlix.  7.  2  Job  xxxiii.  23,  24. 

3  Ritschl,  Lehre  von  tier  RccJitfertigung  und  Versohnung,  ii.  80. 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.         239 

which  might  naturally  suggest  the  thought  it  embodies, 
and  partly  account  for  its  utterance  at  the  present  time. 
May  we  not  find  such  a  point  of  contact  in  the  temple-tax 
incident,  which  happened  at  Capernaum  just  before  the 
final  departure  from  Galilee  ?  -^  On  that  occasion  the 
collectors  of  the  temple  revenue  demanded  of  Peter  the 
didrachmon  or  half-shekel  paid  annually  by  every  adult 
Jew,  in  accordance  with  the  law  laid  down  in  Ex.  xxx.  12. 
In  that  law  the  half-shekel  is  represented  as  a  "  ransom 
(\vTpa)  for  the  soul,"  insuring  the  life  of  each  man  pay- 
ing it  against  the  risk  of  any  plague  breaking  out  in 
connection  with  the  numbering  of  the  people.  When 
the  customary  tribute  was  called  for,  Jesus  consented  to 
pay  it,  under  protest  that  as  the  King's  Son  He  ought  to 
be  free  ;  His  purpose  being  not  seriously  to  object  to  pay- 
ment, but  to  direct  the  attention  of  His  disciples  to  the 
conciliatory  spirit  by  which  His  conduct  was  guided,  in 
tacit  rebuke  of  the  ambitious  passions  which  had  led 
them  to  dispute  by  the  way  which  of  them  should  be  the 
greatest  in  the  kingdom.  There  are  obvious  points  of 
resemblance  between  the  two  situations.  In  both  there 
was  an  outburst  of  ambition  within  the  disciple-circle  to 
be  dealt  with ;  in  both  the  Master,  conscious  of  being  a 
great  one — a  King's  Son  or  a  King — holds  Himself  up 
to  His  disciples  as  an  example,  as  one  who  does  not 
stand  upon  His  rights  and  dignities,  but  assumes  a  servile 
position  in  a  spirit  of  humility.  There  is  not  now,  as 
then,  a  half-shekel  to  be  paid  in  the  form  of  a  temple- 
tax  ;  but  there  is  a  life  to  be  demanded  within  the  next 
few  days,  a  tax  also  imposed  in  the  name  of  religion,  to 
1  Matt.  xvii.  24. 


240  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

be  as  cheerfully  paid,  and  with  greater  ease ;  for  the 
owner  of  this  life  was  so  poor  that  an  exaction  not 
exceeding  in  value  half-a-crown  was  beyond  His  means. 
How  natural  that  the  mind  of  Jesus  should  revert  to  the 
incident  which  occurred  in  Capernaum  three  months  ago, 
and,  connecting  the  tribute  then  paid  with  its  original 
purpose,  as  stated  in  the  book  of  Exodus,  should  conceive 
of  the  new  act  of  self -humbling  service  about  to  be  per- 
formed as  the  paying  of  a  ransom  for  the  people,  who  in 
ignorance  were  on  the  point  of  throwing  His  life  away 
as  a  thing  of  no  value  !  It  is  as  if  He  had  said :  "  Then 
they  asked  of  Me  a  small  coin  for  their  temple,  which  I 
had  not  to  give ;  now  they  ask  of  Me  my  life,  which  it  is 
in  My  power  freely  to  lay  down.  This  life,  though  they 
know  it  not,  is,  like  the  half-shekel,  their  ransom  money, 
and  I  gladly  yield  it  up  to  save  their  souls  from  death." 

The  foregoing  account  of  the  genesis  of  this  saying  I 
offer  with  diffidence,  but  not  without  a  feeling  that  on 
various  grounds  it  merits  serious  consideration.  In  the 
first  place,  it  removes  from  the  saying  the  aspect  of  isola- 
tion, by  bringing  it  into  natural  association  with  known 
experiences  and  utterances  of  Jesus.  It  also  divests  it 
of  that  abstract  theological  aspect  which  has  given  rise 
to  suspicion  of  its  genuineness,  and  makes  it  appear, 
like  all  the  words  of  Jesus,  full  of  pathos  and  poetic 
spirit.  It  has  this  further  recommendation,  that  it 
brings  the  saying  in  question  into  surprisingly  close 
contact  with  a  statement  concerning  the  significance  of 
Christ's  death  made  by  that  apostle,  who,  as  a  disciple, 
played  a  principal  part  in  the  Capernaum  incident. 
"  Ye  were  not  redeemed,"  writes  Peter,  "  with  corruptible 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        241 

things,  as  silver  and  gold,  from  your  vain  conversation 
received  by  tradition  from  your  fathers ;  but  with  the 
precious  blood  of  Christ."  ^  One  can  hardly  help  thinking 
that  he  had  the  two  evangelic  incidents  in  his  mind  when 
he  wrote  that  sentence,  so  that  for  himself  it  meant :  your 
fathers  paid  half-a-shekel  for  the  temple  service  as  a 
ransom  for  their  lives ;  it  took  something  more  and  very 
different,  even  the  life-blood  of  Jesus,  to  redeem  you  from 
the  bondage  of  a  vain  religious  tradition,  and  to  make 
you  Christians.  The  mention  of  silver  connects  the  text 
with  the  earlier  incident,  the  expression  iXvrpojOrjTe  (ye 
were  redeemed)  connects  it  with  the  memorable  word  in 
which  Jesus  spoke  of  His  life  given  up  to  death  as  a 
XvTpov. 

Thus  far  of  what  may  be  called  the  psychological 
history  of  this  saying ;  what  now  is  to  be  said  as  to  its 
didactic  significance  ?  What  precisely  does  it  teach  us  ? 
This  much  at  least,  that  the  death  of  Jesus,  voluntarily 
endured,  is  somehow  the  means  of  delivering  from 
death  the  souls  of  the  many :  He  died  that  they  might 
live ;  He  died  willingly,  because  He  believed  that  thereby 
He  could  render  this  service.  This  much,  and  perhaps 
not  much  more.  How  the  death  of  the  Son  of  Man 
brings  life  to  others,  and  whether  the  life  thus  procured 
could  not  be  obtained  in  any  other  way,  does  not  appear. 
We  may  have  recourse  to  the  sacrificial  system  in  search 
of  the  needful  supplementary  explanations.  In  classic 
usage  the  term  Xvrpov  was  applied  to  expiatory  sacri- 
fices ;  ^  and  it  is  also  so  used  in  the  New  Testament,  as 

1  1  Pet.  i.  18. 

2  Vide  on  this  Cremei's  Woj-terhich,  inider  the  word  T^vrpau, 

Q 


V 


2-42  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

in  the  text  quoted  above  from  the  First  Epistle  of  Peter.^ 
But  to  import  exact  theological  determinations  from 
other  quarters  into  a  text  is  not  the  function  of  strict 
exposition.  In  this  profound  saying  our  Lord  has 
bequeathed  to  His  Church  a  theological  problem,  rather 
than  supplied  her  with  a  full  solution. 

As  a  sufferer  for  righteousness,  Jesus,  we  saw,  is  not 
without  companions.  Is  there  companionship  between 
Him  and  His  disciples  in  this  second  aspect  of  suffering 
also  ?  May  Christians  as  well  as  their  Lord  lay  down 
their  lives  as  a  ransom  for  others  ?  It  depends  on  the 
sense  in  which  we  understand  the  term.  Companionship 
with  Jesus  in  suffering  for  the  spiritual  good  of  others  is 
possible.  Jesus  recognised  this  when  He  said  to  James 
and  John,  "  Ye  shall  indeed  drink  of  the  cup  that  I  drink 
of ;  and  with  the  baptism  that  I  am  baptized  withal 
shall  ye  be  baptized."  ^  Strictly  interpreted,  indeed,  this 
was  merely  a  prediction  of  suffering  for  the  Christian 
faith,  identical  with  the  cross-bearing  of  the  first  lesson. 
But  it  is  permissible  to  borrow  light  on  this  mystery  of 
suffering  from  the  beneficent  function  ascribed  by  Jesus 
to  His  own  suffering,  and  to  say  that  in  all  cases  where 
suffering  is  endured  for  righteousness,  there  is  reaction 
in  the  way  of  benefit,  even  to  those  who  were  the  un- 
righteous cause  of  suffering.  Saul's  conversion  was  in 
part  caused  by  Stephen's  martyrdom,  and  the  hand  which 

^  Peter  possfljly  combined  the  present  saying  of  Jesus  with  that 
spoken  at  the  institution  of  the  Su})per,  to  be  considered  fartlier  on, 
and  so  got  the  idea  of  redemption  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  as  a 
Lamb. 

2  Mark  x.  39.  In  the  corresponding  passage  in  Matthew's  narra- 
tive the  second  clause  is  not  genuine. 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        243 

he  had  in  it.  Thus  good  was  returned  for  evil.  The 
moral  order  of  the  divine  kingdom  provides  for  this 
happening  on  the  great  scale.  Its  citizens  suffer  through 
the  world's  sin,  and  their  sufferings  convince  the  world  of 
sin,  and  make  many  conquests  for  the  kingdom.  The 
blood  of  the  martyrs  is  the  seed  of  the  Church,  and  the 
knowledge  of  the  fact  helps  them  to  die.  Thus  far 
there  is  companionship  with  Jesus.  But  when  the"~T 
benefit  rendered  by  death  is  conceived  of  as  an  atone-  ' 
ment  for  sin.  He  must  be  alone,  for  He  alone  is  sinless. 
Eighteousness,  viewed  impersonally,  suffers  for  the  un- 
righteous in  all  the  citizens  of  the  kingdom,^  but  only 
One  can  suffer  as  the  Just  for  the  unjust. 

The  thiixl  lesson  in  the  doctrine  of  the  cross  was  given 
in  the  house  of  Simon  of  Bethany,  in  connection  with 
the  anointing  of  Jesus  by  Mary.  This  lesson  has  not 
been  recognised  as  one  at  all,  or  at  least  as  available  for 
theological  purposes.  I  venture  to  include  it,  how^ever, 
among  the  few  precious  hints  communicated  by  Jesus  to 
His  disciples  concerning  the  significance  of  His  death, 
being  convinced  that  in  doing  so  I  am  acting  in  accord- 
ance with  His  own  wish  as  expressed  in  the  remarkable 
w^ords  recorded  by  the  first  two  evangelists :  "  Verily  I 
say  unto  you.  Wheresoever  the  gospel  shall  be  preached  / 
throughout  the  whole  w^orld,  this  also  that  she  hath  done 
shall  be  spoken  of  for  a  memorial  of  her."  ^  As  I  under- 
stand this  declaration,  so  solemnly  introduced,  it  amounts 

^  This  truth  we  are  taught  by  Isa.  liii.,  where  the  sufferer  is  in 
the  first  place  the  ideal  Israel,  the  faithful  portion  of  the  nation 
hearing  the  sins  of  the  unfaithful. 

2  Matt.  xxvi.  13  ;  Mark  xiv.  9. 


244        .  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

/  to  an  intimation  by  Jesus  that  His  own  deed  in  dying 
was  in  spirit  similar  to  the  deed  performed  by  Mary  on 
Himself,  when,  regardless  of  expense,  she  broke  the 
alabaster  vase,  and  poured  its  precious  contents  on  His 
head.  However  much  He  might  desire  that  compensa- 
tion might  be  made  to  Mary  for  the  wrong  done  to  her 
by  churlish  critics,  through  her  praises  being  sung  in 
after  ages,  He  would  hardly  have  deemed  her  act  worthy 
of  perpetual  eulogy,  unless  He  had  regarded  it  as  pos- 
sessing moral  affinity  to  His  own  act  in  shedding  His 
life-blood,  and  therefore  as  fit  to  be  used  in  illustration 
of  its  meaning.  He  thinks  of  that  tragic  act  for  the 
moment  as  the  great  theme  of  the  preacher.  "  The 
gospel  "  He  speaks  of  is  not  merely  the  general  gospel  of 
the  kingdom,  but  more  specifically  the  gospel  in  His 
death.  A  not  unimportant  part  of  the  third  lesson 
consists  just  in  this  application  of  the  term  "  gospel " 
to  an  impending  catastrophe,  which  to  the  uninstructed 
eye  can  appear  only  as  a  horrible,  disastrous  fate.  It 
teaches  that  ultimate  great  good  to  many  will  come  out 
of  this  evil.  But  the  most  valuable  contribution  to  the 
doctrine  of  the  cross  consists  in  the  light  thrown  on  the 
ethical  character  of  Christ's  action  in  submitting  to 
crucifixion,  by  the  suggested  comparison  between  His 
deed  in  dying  and  Mary's  deed  in  anointing  Him.  A 
gospel  already,  inasmuch  as  out  of  a  temporary  calamity 
comes  permanent  good,  that  death  is  revealed  to  be 
doubly  a  gospel  when  it  is  made  to  appear  as  a  deed 
done  out  of  pure,  generous,  uncalculating  love  to  men. 
The  gospel  in  Christ's  death  thus  becomes  "  this  gospel," 
as  it   is  called  in  Matthew's  narrative, — the  gospel  in  a 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        245 

death  of  which  Mary's  act  of  love  is  an  apt  emblem. 
As  such  it  is  a  gospel  of  that  generous,  magnificent 
character  which  to  the  eye  of  the  churl  is  apt  to  appear 
wastefulness.  There  can  be  little  doubt  that  Jesus  had 
in  view  to  point  out  the  affinity  between  His  deed  and 
Mary's  in  this  respect  in  speaking  of  His  gospel  as  one 
to  be  preached  in  the  whole  world, — a  very  remarkable  ^ 
statement,  containing,  as  has  been  observed,  the  most 
reliable  word  of  the  last  period  of  Christ's  life  concerning 
the  universal  destination  of  Christianity.^  Thereby  He 
set  the  large  aim  of  His  redeeming  love  side  by  side 
with  the  muuificence  which  had  exposed  Mary  to  censure. 
He  would  defend  her  by  pleading  guilty  to  the  same 
charge  of  waste  in  the  broadest  possible  terms.  Waste 
is  relative  to  the  critic's  point  of  view.  From  Peter's 
point  of  view  at  Caesarea,  it  was  waste  in  Jesus  to  die  at 
all.  From  a  Judaist's  point  of  view,  it  was  waste  to  die 
for  more  than  the  chosen  race.  From  the  Calvinist's 
point  of  view,  it  may  appear  waste  in  the  Saviour  to  die 
for  more  than  the  elect.  As  against  all  these  possible 
charges  of  waste,  Jesus  in  effect  replies :  I  die  because  I 
love  My  countrymen,  and  would  fain  ransom  their  souls 
from  bondage ;  I  die  for  pagans  as  well  as  for  Jews, 
because  I  love  them  also ;  I  die  for  ev^-y  human 
creature,  because  all  men  are  My  brethren  and  God's 
prodigal  children.  The  mind  of  Jesus  in  this  matter 
has  not  been  understood  and  appreciated  by  all  His 
followers.  Many  have  even  denied  the  wastefulness 
which  He  virtually  acknowledges ;  but  in  vain,  for  this 
grand,  large-hearted  way,  which  to  the  narrow-hearted 
1  Keim,  Jesu  von  Nazara. 


246  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

wears  the  aspect  of  waste,  is  characteristic  of  all  the 
noble.  It  is  the  way  of  God  Himself,  and  of  all  who 
are  worthy  to  be  called  His  sons.  Here  also  Jesus  has 
companions.  Prophets,  apostles,  martyrs  throw  their 
lives  away  for  the  world's  good,  and  the  world  calls  them 
fools  for  their  pains,  and  is  benefited  by  those  of  whom 
it  is  not  worthy. 

The  fourth  lesson  in  the  doctrine  of  the  cross  is  con- 
tained in  the  words  spoken  by  Jesus  when  He  put  into 
the  hands  of  His  disciples  the  sacramental  cup  at  the 
institution  of  the  Holy  Supper.  Negative  criticism  has 
been  very  active  here,  cutting  down  the  genuine  utter- 
ance of  our  Lord  to  very  small  dimensions,  by  treating 
as  later  additions  the  words  et?  a^eaiv  dfiapTicov  ("  for 
the  remission  of  sins ")  found  only  in  Matthew ;  the 
expressions  irepl  ttoWmv,  virep  vjiciyv  (shed  "  for  many  I' 
"  for  you  "),  which  give  to  the  death  of  Jesus  a  sacrificial 
character;  and  the  very  remarkable  phrase  ^  Kaivrj 
ZLaOrjK.7]  occurring  in  Luke's  account  of  the  institution, 
and  also  in  Paul's,  and  supposed  to  owe  its  origin  to  the 
apostle's  influence,  being  as  it  were  a  summary  embodi- 
ment of  his  universalistic  view  of  Christianity.  In  con- 
nection with  this  last  phrase  stress  is  laid  on  the  fact 
that  in  both  Matthew  and  Mark  the  best  attested 
reading  is  not  tt)?  KaLvrj^  BtaO/jKiji;,  but  simply  t^? 
Zia6rjK7)<;.  Baur  admits  that  the  sense  remains  substan- 
tially the  same  though  the  epithet  "  new "  be  omitted, 
seeing  that  if  the  blood  of  Jesus  be  the  blood  of  a 
covenant,  the  covenant  formed  through  His  blood  can 
only  be  a  new  one  ;  but  just  on  that  account  he  doubts 
the  genuineness  even  of  the  shorter  reading,  and  thinks 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        247 

that  the  reference  to  a  covenant  giving  to  the  death  of 
Jesus  a  sacrificial  character  found  its  way  into  the 
Gospels  through  the  influence  of  Paul's  doctrinal  con- 
struction of  the  evangelic  tradition  concerning  the 
Supper.  But  this  is  criticism  carried  to  an  extreme 
in  the  interest  of  a  theory.  The  reference  to  a  covenant, 
occurring  in  all  the  four  accounts  of  the  institution, 
must  be  accepted  as  genuine ;  and  its  acceptance  carries 
along  with  it,  if  not  the  genuineness,  at  least  the  sub- 
stantial accuracy  of  the  other  phrases,  viewed  as  inter- 
pretive glosses  added  to  the  original  utterance.  The 
covenant  referred  to,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  must 
be  ne^Y.  Being  a  covenant  in  Christ's  blood  it  is  a 
covenant  founded  on  sacrifice,  and  the  expressions  shed 
"  for  many  "  and  "  for  you  "  are  justified  ;  which,  how- 
ever, may  be  accepted  as  genuine  in  their  own  right  as 
occurring  with  insignificant  variations  as  to  form  in  all 
the  narratives.  And  according  to  all  the  analogies  of 
the  Old  Testament  sacrificial  system,  what  can  "blood 
shed  for  many "  mean,  but  blood  shed  for  the 
remission  of  sins  ?  Instead  therefore  of  following  the 
example  of  the  Tubingen  critics,  and  reducing  the 
words  of  Jesus  to  the  bald  formula:  This  bread 
broken  is  (represents)  My  body,  this  wine  poured  out 
is  My  blood,  we  shall  come  nearer  the  truth,  at  least 
as  to  meaning,  if,  with  Keim  and  Eeuss,  we  accept  the 
account  obtained  by  combination  of  all  the  narratives  as 
a  correct  version  of  the  words  of  institution.  On  Baur's 
view  of  what  Jesus  said  all  that  was  intended  by  the 
breaking  of  the  bread  and  the  pouring  out  of  the  wine 
was  to  make  a  pathetic  symbolic  announcement  of  the 


248        .  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

approaching  passion.  It  is  morally  certain  that  Jesus 
littered  words  which  gave  His  disciples  a  most 
important  hint  as  to  the  significance  of  His  passion, 
affording  clearer  insight  into  the  mystery  than  any  pre- 
viously spoken.  Virtually,  if  not  in  so  many  words, 
He  said :  This  cup  denotes  My  blood,  the  blood  of  a  new 
covenant  shed  for  many  for  the  remission  of  sins.^ 

It  is  natural  to  assume  that  in  uttering  these  words, 
or  words  of  similar  import,  Jesus  had  present  to  His 
mind  the  paschal  lamb,  slain  at  the  feast  then  being 
celebrated,  which  commemorated  the  deliverance  of  the 
children  of  Israel  out  of  Egypt ;  the  solemn  rites  con- 
nected with  the  ratification  of  the  covenant  at  Sinai ;  ^ 
and  the  prophetic  oracle  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah  con- 
cerning a  new  covenant  of  grace,  having  for  its  leading 
blessings  the  law  written  on  the  heart,  the  knowledge  of 
God  brought  within  the  reach  of  all,  and  the  full  for- 
giveness of  all  sin.^  He  might  thus  be  regarded  as 
offering  Himself  to  the  faith  of  His  followers  at  once  as 
a  paschal  lamb  whose  blood  shields  from  the  destroying 
angel ;  as  a  peace-offering  whose  blood  sprinkled  on  the 
members  of  the  holy  commonwealth  consecrates  them  to 
the  Lord ;  as  a  sin-offering  on  the  ground  of  which  God 
bestows  on  men  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins.  The  last 
of  these  three  views  is  the  one  chiefly  to  be  emphasized, 
as  the  gist  or  kernel  of  the  final  lesson  taught  by  Jesus 
concerning  the  significance  of  His  death.  In  this  lesson 
advantage  is  taken  of  the  ancient  sacrificial  system  as  an 
aid  to  the  comprehension  of  the  mystery.      It  does  help 

'  For  Baiir's  view?,  vide  NeutestamentUche  TJieologie,  SS.  101-5. 
2  E.x.  xxiv.  5-8.  3  jer.  xx^i.  31. 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGNIFICANCE.        249 

US  SO  far,  but  after  we  have  made  the  most  of  it  we  are 
still  much  in  the  dark  as  to  the  connection  between  the 
death  of  the  sacrificial  victim  and  the  pardon  of  sin. 
The  Levitical  sacrifices  did  not  deal  effectually  with  the 
problem.  They  were  merely  putative  atonements  for 
artificial  sins  ;  for  the  ignorances  or  ritual  errors  of  the 
people,  not  for  their  great  moral  transgressions.  More 
light  comes  to  us  by  reflection  on  the  nature  of  the 
sacrifice  by  which  the  new  covenant  is  inaugurated  than 
from  the  whole  Levitical  system.  Here  for  the  first  time 
we  have  priest  and  victim  united  in  one.  Christ's 
sacrifice  is  Himself.  Here  the  virtue  lies  not  in  the 
blood,  though  that  is  formally  mentioned,  but  in  the 
offering  of  a  perfect  will  through  the  eternal  spirit  of 
holy  love.  In  this  offering  God  can  take  pleasure,  not 
because  of  the  pain  and  the  blood-shedding,  but  in  spite 
of  these.  By  the  virtue  of  this  offering  God  is  reconciled 
to  the  world,  and  can  regard  with  a  benignant  eye  a 
guilty  race.  We  are  accepted  in  the  Beloved,  the 
Messianic  King  and  His  subjects  being  an  organic  unity 
in  God's  sight. 

By  this  sacrifice  of  nobler  name  Jesus  not  only  pro- 
cured for  us  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  but  inaugurated  a  new 
era.  His  death  was  the  signal  for  the  passing  away  of 
the  old  world  of  Judaism,  and  for  the  incoming  of  the 
new  world  of  Christianity.  This  truth  He  proclaimed 
when  He  called  His  blood  the  blood  of  a  new  covenant. 
In  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  He  said,  "  I  came  not  to 
destroy ; "  on  the  eve  of  His  passion  He  virtually  declares 
the  contrary.  The  contrast  has  been  adduced  to  prove 
that  on  the  later  occasion  He  cannot  have  spoken  as  the 


250;  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

evangelists  represent.^  But  the  argument  is  without 
force.  There  is  a  time  for  everything ;  a  time  to  be 
silent  and  a  time  to  speak.  That  Jesus  anticipated 
extensive  innovation  as  the  ultimate  result  of  His  work, 
is  admitted  by  the  objector.  If  so,  now  was  the  time 
for  Him  to  speak  out,  when  He  was  about  to  endure  His 
last  sufferings,  brought  upon  Him  not  by  any  unseasonable 
utterances  against  the  existing  order  of  things,  but  simply 
by  faithful  witness-bearing  for  truth  and  righteousness. 

The  characteristics  of  the  new  era  are  such  as  flow 
naturally  from  the  sacrifice  on  Calvary. 

1.  Levitical  sacrifices,  never  of  real  value,  pass  away, 
henceforth  utterly  meaningless,  and  are  replaced  by  the 
spiritual  sacrifices  of  a  thankful  mind  and  a  Christ-like 
life.  With  these  antiquated  sacrifices  passes  away  also 
the  institution  of  an  official  priesthood.  In  one  sense 
Christ  is  the  only  Priest ;  in  another  sense  all  are  priests 
who  live  in  Christ's  spirit,  devoted  to  the  kingdom, 
obeying  the  law  of  love. 

2.  The  law  is  written  on  the  heart,  not  on  stone  slabs 
as  of  old.  Duty  is  made  easy  by  assuming  the  form  of 
personal  attachment  to  the  Crucified.  In  treating  of  the 
righteousness  of  the  kingdom,  I  said  that  its  commands 
though  difficult  were  not  grievous,  because  the  motives 
consist  not  in  intimidations,  but  in  inspirations  and 
aspirations.  Among  these  I  named  imitation  of  Christ. 
In  presence  of  the  cross  we  come  in  view  of  a  still  more 
inspiring  motive,  grateful  devotion  to  One  whom  faith 
apprehends  as  a  Eedeemer.  Hereby  the  love  of  right- 
eousness is  transformed  into  a  passionate  desire  to  live 

1  So  Baur. 


THE  DEATH  OF  JESUS  AND  ITS  SIGTJJCH.  253 

lives  rvorthy  of  the  j)rice  by  which  redemption^i  entering 
achifved.  truths 

2.  A  new  brotherhood  comes  into  being  based  on  faien 
in  Jesus  as  the  common  Lord,  and  on  mutual  love. 
Isiael  was  made  a  nation  by  the  consciousness  of  common  I 
deliverance  out  of  Egypt  commemorated  in  the  Passover.? 
Even  so  Christendom  takes  its  rise,  a  well-compacted 
kingdom  of  God,  out  of  the  consciousness  of  redemption 
from  sin  through  Jesus  Christ  shared  by  every  one  who 
bears  His  name.  In  this  community  love  comes  to  its 
rights.  It  not  only  becomes  the  royal  law  of  the 
kingdom,  but  it  is  honoured  with  a  divine  throne.  The 
cross  is  the  symbol  of  dominion,  and  the  Crucified  is 
worshipped  as  God.  The  moral  order  of  the  universe 
is  believed  to  be  carried  on  in  the  interest  of  holy  love, 
giving  love  scope  to  bear  the  burdens  of  others,  letting 
it  feel  their  full  weight,  and  assigning  to  it  a  full  reward 
in  power  to  bless  those  whose  sin  and  misery  it  has  borne. 

These  characteristics  find  recognition  and  expression 
in  the  Holy  Supper.  Therein  we  remember  the  one 
sacrifice  which  effectually  dealt  with  the  problem  of  sin  ; 
declare  our  obligation  to  Him  who  redeemed  us,  and  our 
devotion  to  His  service ;  acknowledge  that  we  are  a 
brotherhood  bound  to  walk  in  love ;  and  honour  love 
crucified  as  the  most  worshipful  thing  in  the  universe. 
We  cannot  doubt  that  a  rite  capable  of  giving  symbolic 
utterance  to  so  much  meaning  was  intended  to  be 
repeated.  Jesus  said  in  effect,  if  not  in  so  many  words, 
"Do  this  in  remembrance  of  Me."  To  perform  so 
pathetic  an  act  once  was  to  make  it  a  standing 
institution. 


250 

evangeli?' 
force. 


CHAPTER  XL 

THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHUECH. 

The  kingdom  of  God,  in  one  view  of  it,  is  an  ideal 
hovering  in  heavenly  purity  above  all  earthly  realities, 
and  not  to  be  sought  or  found  in  any  existing  society, 
civil  or  ecclesiastical.  It  is  an  inspiration  rather  than  an 
institution.  It  possesses  the  quality  of  inwardness.  It 
comes  not  with  observation,  but  has  its  seat  in  the  heart. 
Wherever  there  is  a  human  soul  believing  in  the  Father- 
hood of  God,  and  cherishing  towards  God  the  spirit  of 
sonship  and  towards  man  the  spirit  of  brotherhood,  there 
is  the  kingdom  manifesting  its  presence  in  righteousness, 
peace,  and  spiritual  joy,  and  in  philanthropic  deeds. 

But  all  ideals  crave  embodiment.  Every  great  thought 
which  takes  a  powerful  hold  of  the  human  mind  tends 
to  assume  visibility  as  a  historical  movement,  and  to 
become  the  organizing  principle  of  a  new  society.  Man 
is  a  social  being,  and  his  social  instinct  comes  into  play 
in  connection  with  everything  that  deeply  stirs  him ; 
therefore  very  specially  in  religion,  which,  when  sincere, 
is  the  most  powerful  of  all  factors  in  human  conduct. 
In  connection  with  such  a  religious  ideal  as  that  set 
forth  in  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  association  was  inevitable. 
The  very  term  "  kingdom  "  is  suggestive  of  society,  and 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH.  253 

when  it  is  considered  that  among  the  elements  entering 
into  the  idea  expressed  by  the  term  are  the  great  truths 
of  the  Fatherhood  of  God,  and  the  brotherhood  of  men 
as  the  children  of  God,  it  becomes  apparent  that  recep- 
tion of  the  idea,  independently  of  any  originative  action 
on  the  part  of  Christ,  must  lead  spontaneously  to  the 
creation  of  a  society  having  for  its  aim  to  give  expres- 
sion to  the  fellowship  of  its  members  in  faith  and  life. 

It  cannot  therefore  surprise  us  to  learn  from  the 
Gospel  records  that  Jesus  contemplated,  not  only  as  a 
probable  occurrence,  but  as  a  thing  to  be  desired,  the 
formation  of  such  a  society.  The  first  distinct  intima- 
tion of  His  wish  or  purpose  was  given  on  the  occasion 
of  the  visit  to  C?esarea  Philippi,  in  other  respects  so 
memorable.  There  can,  however,  be  little  doubt  that 
He  had  the  momentous  step  in  view  at  a  much  earlier 
period,  at  least  as  early  as  the  choice  of  the  twelve.  It 
has  indeed  been  maintained  that  at  that  time  Jesus 
aimed  at  converting  to  righteousness  the  whole  Jewish 
people,  and  so  setting  up  the  theocratic  kingdom,  and 
that  He  called  together  the  twelve  merely  that  they 
might  act  as  His  assistants  in  carrying  on  that  work.^ 
The  choice  certainly  had  a  close  connection,  both  in  time 
and  in  purpose,  with  the  evangelistic  mission  in  Galilee ; 
but  that  it  had  an  ulterior  object  in  view  may  be  inferred 
from  the  terms  in  which  the  second  evangelist  describes 
the  transaction :  "  He  ordained  twelve  that  they  should  he 
with  Him,  and  that  He  might  send  them  forth  to  preach," 
etc.^  The  chief  end  of  the  choice,  according  to  this 
account,  evidently  was  companionship  and  discipleship 
1  Weiss,  Lehen  Jcau,  ii.  SS.  38,  79.  -  Mark  iii.  14. 


254  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

in  order  to  training  for  a  future  vocation  known  to  the 
Master,  though  not  at  first  fully  explained  to  the  men 
whom  He  associated  with  Himself.  The  composition  of 
the  disciple-circle  supplies  a  significant  hint  as  to  the 
nature  of  that  vocation.  The  admission  to  the  society 
of  such  a  man  as  Matthew  or  Levi,  belonging  to  a  class 
obnoxious  to  all  Jews  who  cherished  the  sentiment  of 
national  independence,  was  most  impolitic  and  therefore 
most  improbable,  if  the  one  aim  of  Jesus  was  the  erection 
of  a  theocratic  kingdom  confined  to  Israel,  and  embracing, 
if  possible,  the  whole  nation.  It  w^as,  on  the  other  hand, 
not  only  unobjectionable  but  felicitously  emblematic,  if 
the  end  contemplated  were  the  gathering  together  from 
all  parts  of  the  world  of  an  eclectic  society  in  which 
distinctions  of  class  and  nation  were  to  be  io-nored. 

Of  this  society,  foreshadowed  by  the  constitution  of 
the  apostolic  band,  Jesus  at  length,  when  His  end  drew 
near,  began  to  speak  as  an  institution  about  to  come  into 
existence.  "  I  will  build  My  Church^  ^  The  name, 
eKKXrjaca  is  appropriate,  as  denoting  a  new  institution 
of  an  eclectic  character,  distinct  both  from  the  Jewish 
nation  and  from  the  synagogue,  though  familiar  to  all 
readers  of  the  Septuagint  as  a  title  applied  to  the  people 
of  Israel  in  its  religious  aspect  as  a  chosen  race  in 
covenant  with  God.^  The  manner  of  the  announcement, 
"  I  will  build  J/y  Church  " — not  a  church,  is  significant, 
specially  as  showing  that  the  idea,  though  new  probably 
to  the  disciples,  is  familiar  to  the  speaker.  The  time 
selected  for  making  the  announcement  is  seasonable. 
Jesus  is  now  within  measurable  distance  of  His  end,  and 
^  Matt.  xvi.  18.  2  j/jjg  Cremer's  Worterhiich. 


THE  JilNGDOM  AND  THE  CHUECH.  255 

it  is  fitting  that,  in  referring  for  the  first  time  in  explicit 
terms  to  that  unwelcome  fact,  He  should  say :  "  I  am 
about  to  die,  but  I  will  le^ve  behind  Me  an  enduring 
society  bearing  My  name."  At  the  moment  He  is  a 
fugitive  from  the  scenes  of  His  public  ministry,  rejected 
by  His  countrymen,  and  finds  Himself  in  the  proximity 
of  the  pagan  world ;  how  natural  that  He  should  seek 
consolation  in  the  thought  of  a  brotherhood  of  faith 
which  will  make  Him  independent  of  unbelieviag  Israel 
for  disciples,  and  give  Him  in  compensation  the  heathen 
for  an  inheritance.  Of  the  universal  outlook  indeed 
nothing  is  said,  but  the  situation  makes  it  almost  certain 
that  it  is  a  subject  of  thought.  It  may  be  taken  for 
granted  that  when  Christ  began  to  speak  of  a  Church, 
His  prospect,  narrowed  in  regard  to  Israel,  widened  out 
in  another  direction.  AVhatever  may  have  been  His 
early  hopes  respecting  His  own  people.  He  expects  now 
only  the  few  to  whom  the  things  of  the  kingdom  are 
revealed  to  accept  Him  as  the  Christ ;  but  His  comfoit 
is  that  He  has  all  the  world  to  choose  from. 

While  elective  in  character,  the  new  society  is  not 
vindictively  conceived  by  the  Founder.  He  does  not 
mean  it  to  be  a  menace  against  unbelief,  nor  will  its 
constitution  be  a  definitive  sentence  of  exclusion  against 
all  not  immediately  embraced  in  the  ecclesia.  The 
reference  to  the  gates  of  Hades  in  the  address  to  Peter 
does  indeed  wear  an  aspect  of  threatening  or  defiance 
natural  in  the  circumstances.  At  this  point  the  tone  of 
Christ's  utterances  on  this  occasion  resembles  that  audible 
in  the  saying,  "Neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  is  pleased 


256  >  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

to  reveal  Him."  But  the  deepest  wish  of  His  heart  now, 
as  on  the  earlier  occasion,  is  not  exclusion,  but  the 
widest  possible  inclusiveness.  He  does  not  intend  His 
Church  to  be  a  mere  fortress  with  drawn  bridge  and 
closed  gates,  its  occupants  prepared  for  defence,  and 
thinking  of  nothing  beyond.  His  purpose  is  that  the 
host  which  bears  His  name,  though  necessarily  defen- 
sive at  first,  should  ultimately  march  forth  to  conquer 
the  world.  Election  is  but  the  method  by  which  He 
uses  the  few  to  bless  the  many.  This  truth  He  taught 
in  the  familiar  sayings  uttered  to  and  concerning 
disciples  :  "  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth  ;  "  "  Ye  are  the 
light  of  the  world  ;"^  as  also  in  the  parable  which  likens 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  leaven  put  into  a  measure  of 
meal,  that  it  may  leaven  the  whole  lump.^  That  disciple 
to  whom  such  prominence  was  given  when  the  Church 
was  first  spoken  of,  showed  how  well  he  understood  the 
mind  of  the  Master  on  this  subject  when  he  characterized 
the  ecdcsia,  now  actually  in  existence,  as  a  chosen  genera- 
tion called  out  of  darkness  to  show  forth  the  virtues  of 
Him  to  whom  they  owed  their  high  privileges.^  Onlj 
when  so  conceived  is  election  either  scriptural  or  whole- 
some. When  it  is  thought  of  as  involving  monopoly  of 
divine  favour  and  reprobation  of  all  without,  as  it  was 
by  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's  day,  then  the  salt  loses  its 
savour,  and  the  light  is  extinguished  by  being  placed 
under  a  bushel.  The  salt  exists  that  it  may  preserve 
the  mass  liable  to  corruption ;  the  light  is  meant  to 
shine  that  God  the  Father  may  be  glorified,  and  the 
darkened  souls  of  men  spiritually  illumined.  The 
1  Matt.  V.  13,  14.  2  Matt.  xiii.  33.  ^  i  Pet.  ii.  9. 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH.  257 

principle,  "  natural  law  in  the  spiritual  world,"  is  emphati- 
cally false  here.  In  nature  the  few  are  chosen,  and  the 
many  are  ruthlessly  cast  away ;  the  fit  survive,  the  unfit 
perish,  and  the  unconscious  cosmos  sheds  no  tear.  In 
the  kingdom  of  God  it  is  far  otherwise.  The  chosen  few 
seek  the  good  of  the  many ;  the  fit  strive  to  preserve  the 
unfit.  This  is  their  very  vocation,  and  when  they  cease 
to  pursue  it  they  themselves  become  unfit,  useless, 
reprobate. 

An  important  step  towards  the  founding  of  the  Church 
was  taken  when  the  new  society  was  furnished  with 
symbolic  rites  serving  as  bonds  of  union  and  means  of 
fellowship.  Of  one  of  these,  baptism,  no  mention  is 
made  in  the  evangelic  records  till  after  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus.  To  those  who  interpret  the  Gospel  narratives 
on  the  basis  of  naturalism,  by  whom  therefore  all  that 
belongs  to  the  post-resurrection  period  must  be  prO' 
nounced  unhistorical,  this  fact  may  appear  to  prove  that 
Christian  baptism  has  no  sanction  in  the  teaching  of  our 
Lord.  This,  however,  is  not  a  necessary  conclusion  even 
on  naturalistic  principles.  It  is  conceivable  that  a 
direction  given  by  Jesus  to  His  disciples  concerning  the 
rite,  before  His  death,  say  on  the  eve  of  the  passion,  at 
the  same  time  that  the  Holy  Supper  was  instituted, 
might  have  been  transferred  by  the  evangelist  to  what 
was  deemed  a  specially  suitable  place  in  the  history — 
the  final  leave-taking,  there  to  assume  the  character  of  a 
last  instruction  by  the  Master  just  before  His  ascension, 
to  the  future  apostles.  This  were  only  to  suppose  that 
Matthew  took  a  liberty  with  words  relating  to  baptism 
similar  to  that  taken  by  Luke  in  placing  the  account  of 

K 


258  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Christ's  preaching  in  the  synagogue  of  Nazareth  near 
the  beginning  of  his  Gospel.  This  view,  accordingly, 
is  regarded  favourably  by  Keim,  who  thinks  it  highly 
improbable  that  baptism  would  have  obtained  universal 
recognition  in  the  apostolic  Church  unless  it  had  been 
known  to  have  on  its  side  the  authority  of  Jesus.^ 

Not  only  the  time  at  which,  but  also  the  precise  terms 
in  which,  Jesus  is  reported  to  have  given  directions  con- 
cerning the  initiatory  rite,  have  been  the  subject  of 
doubting  criticism.  The  assailable  points  are  the  explicit 
universalism :  "  Go  ye  therefore  and  make  disciples  of 
all  the  nations,"  and  the  Trinitarian  baptismal  formula, 
"  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the 
Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  ^  As  to  the  former,  it  is 
sufficient  to  remark  that  the  universalism  of  the  final 
directory  is  little  more  pronounced  than  that  of  the  well- 
authenticated  words  spoken  on  the  occasion  of  the 
anointing  in  Bethany :  "  Wheresoever  this  gospel  shall 
be  preached  in  the  whole  world."  Then  with  reference 
to  the  Trinity  of  the  baptismal  formula,  it  is  to  be 
observed  that  it  simply  sums  up  in  brief  compass  the 
teaching  of  Jesus.  He  taught  His  own  disciples  to 
regard  God  as  their  Father,  and  to  accept  Himself  as 
God's  Son,  the  revealer  of  the  Father  and  the  prototype 
of  sonship.  Of  the  Holy  Spirit  He  seldom  spoke,  so  far 
as  appears  from  the  synoptical  records,  wherein  functions 
which,  following  Pauline  usage,  we  should  ascribe  to  the 
Spirit,  are  assigned  to  the  Father  and  the  Son.  The 
Father  reveals  the  things  of  the  kingdom  to  the  " babes ;"^ 

^  Keim,  Jes^n  von  Nazarn,  iii.  28G.  ^  Matt,  xxviii.  19. 

3  Matt.  xi.  25. 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH.  259 

Peter's  insight  into  the  doctrine  of  the  Christ  comes  from 
the  same  source ;  ^  the  Son  who  alone  knows  the  Father 
reveals  Him  to  such  as  He  deems  worthy.^  But  the  few 
texts  referring  to  the  Spirit  ascribe  to  Him  the  same 
function  of  spiritual  illumination,  and  represent  Him  as 
the  source  of  spiritual  energy  and  sanctity.  When 
disciples  are  called  on  to  answer  for  their  faith,  it  is  the 
Spirit  of  their  Father  who  speaketh  in  them,^  and  it  is 
but  a  corollary  from  this  that  it  is  the  same  Spirit  wdio 
reveals  to  them  the  faith  which  by  His  aid  they  are 
enabled  to  defend.  That  the  Spirit  is  the  sanctifier  is 
implied  in  the  closing  words  of  the  great  lesson  on 
prayer :  "  How  much  more  shall  your  heavenly  Father 
give  the  Holy  Spirit  to  them  that  ask  Him."  *  That  He 
is  also  the  source  of  all  spiritual  might,  Jesus  emphatically 
taught  when  He  represented  His  own  miraculous  deeds 
as  done  through  His  inspiration.^  All  these  positions 
are  implicitly  contained  in  the  representation  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  as  the  object  of  that  form  of  blasphemy 
which  is  unpardonable.  Blasphemy  against  the  Spirit 
can  be  unpardonable  only  because  He  is  the  fountain  of 
light,  and  purity,  and  goodness,  and  power.  It  is  thus  in 
no  wise  improbable  that  in  summarizing  His  teaching  for 
baptismal  purposes,  Jesus  added  to  the  names  of  the 
Father  and  the  Son  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  Neither 
is  it  any  more  improbable  that  He  furnished  such  a 
summary  in  connection  with  instructions  concerning 
baptism,  than  that  He  explained  the  mystic  significance 
of  the  bread  and  the  wine  in  instituting  the  Holy  Supper. 

1  Matt.  xvi.  17.  2  Matt.  xi.  27.  ^  Matt.  x.  20. 

4  Luke  xi.  13.  «  Matt.  xii.  28. 


260  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Ifc  might  seem  so  if  we  identified  the  rudimentary,  moral, 
and  religious  Trinity  of  the  Gospel  with  the  developed, 
metaphysical,  and  speculative  Trinity  of  theology,  which, 
however,  as  Eeuss  has  remarked,  it  is  not  necessary  to 
do.-^  It  is  certainly  true  that  in  the  history  of  the 
apostolic  Church  we  find  no  trace  of  the  use  of  the 
Trinitarian  formula  in  connection  with  baptism.  The 
confession  of  faith  made  by  converts  consisted  simply  in 
the  acknowledgment  of  Jesus  as  the  Christ.  It  does  not 
follow  from  this  that  the  apostles  knew  nothing  of  such 
a  formula,  but  only  that  they  did  not  consider  themselves 
under  bondage  to  a  form  of  words,  but  felt  free  to  use 
an  equivalent  form  which  expressed  exactly  what  was 
necessarily  implied  in  becoming  a  Christian.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  that  Jesus  taught  His  disciples  a  form  of 
prayer,  though  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  apostles 
were  in  the  habit  of  using  it ;  why  then  should  non-use 
of  the  baptismal  formula  be  accepted  as  conclusive  proof 
of  its  non-authenticity  ? 

The  nature  of  the  Church  and  its  relation  to  the 
kingdom  of  God  are  explained  in  the  remarkable  words 
addressed  by  Jesus  to  Peter  after  his  bold  profession  of 
faith  in  the  Messiahship  of  his  Master.^  In  these  words, 
which  are  highly  animated  and  dramatic,  Peter  appears 
as  a  most  important  man.  He  is  the  rock  on  which  the 
Church  is  to  be  built ;  into  his  hands  are  committed  the 

1  Theologle  ChrcHcnnc,  i.  243. 

2  Matt.  xvi.  18,  19.  In  the  commentary  of  Eplirem  Syriis  on 
Tatian's  Diatessaron  this  passage  is  reduced  to  these  ^vords  :  "  Tu 
es  Petra,  et  portai  inferi  te  non  vincent."  Some  critics  take  this  to 
be  the  original  form  of  the  saying,  whence  it  woukl  follow  that 
Christ  on  this  occasion  said  nothing  about  the  Church.    (So  Wendt, 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHUKCH.  261 

keys  of  the  kingdom;  his  acts  in  binding  and  loosing, 
forbidding  and  permitting,  are  valid  in  heaven.  All  this 
belongs  to  the  form  rather  than  to  the  essence  of  the 
thought.  It  says  in  a  highly  emotional  and  Hebrew 
manner  what  can  be  expressed  in  abstract  didactic 
language  which  eliminates  Peter's  personality  as  of  no 
fundamental  moment.  The  imagination  that  the  fact  is 
otherwise  is  one  of  the  gigantic  tragic  mistakes  through 
which  the  Church  has  become  to  a  large  extent  a 
deplorable  failure.  In  connection  with  this  it  is  import- 
ant to  note  that  the  famous  utterance  of  our  Lord  to 
His  disciples  is  found  only  in  the  first  Gospel.  This 
fact  is  no  just  ground  for  suspecting  the  genuineness  of 
the  saying ;  for  it  is  far  too  remarkable  to  have  pro- 
ceeded from  any  one  but  Jesus :  the  very  vehemence 
and  absoluteness  of  its  assertions  which  make  it  so  liable 
to  misunderstanding  are  guarantees  of  its  originality. 
But  the  absence  of  the  words  from  the  other  synoptical 
records  provokes  reflection  as  to  the  reasons  for  omission. 
In  the  case  of  the  third  evangelist  the  motive  may  have 
been  a  consciousness  that  the  words  were  being  used 
already  for  party  purposes,  in  which  case  their  exclusion 
from  his  pages  is  a  silent  protest  against  a  prelatic  or 
hierarchical  spirit  manifesting  itself  in  the  bud.  The 
omission  in  Mark,  on  the  other  hand,  may  be  due  to  the 
influence  of  Peter  himself.     AVe  can  imagine  the  apostle, 

Die  Lehre  Jesu,  S.  181.)  But,  as  Zalin  {Forschungen  zur  Geschichte 
des  neutestamentlichen  Kanons,  Erster  Thiel,  S.  163)  contends, 
Christ's  words  here,  as  often  elsewhere,  are  probably  abbreviated 
by  Ephrem.  The  passage  concerning  the  Church  is  in  Cure- 
ton's  Syriac  version,  which,  according  to  Zahn,  was  that  used  by 
Talian. 


262  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

no  longer  the  forward,  self-asserting  man  that  he  was  as 
a  disciple,  passing  over  in  silence  the  strong  language 
addressed  to  himself  by  the  Master  at  Csesarea  Philippi 
from  a  feeling  of  modesty,  and  doing  so  the  more  readily 
because  he  was  conscious  that  he  did  not  thereby  sacrifice 
any  important  truth,  or  seriously  mutilate  his  testimony. 
In  treating  the  personality  of  Peter  as  of  subordinate 
importance,  I  do  not  mean  to  affirm  that  the  address  to 
him  was  a  matter  of  idle  form.  It  was  natural  in  the 
circumstances,  and  characteristic,  that  Jesus  should  put 
the  truth  concerning  the  Church  to  be  founded  in  that 
concrete  dramatic  way.  Here  He  was  a  fugitive  from 
an  unbelieving  people,  in  presence  of  the  first  man  who 
had  said  with  clear  intelligence  and  firm  conviction, 
"  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  How 
natural  that  He  should  speak  of  this  man  as  the  first 
stone  of  the  new  edifice ;  and  that,  as  if  in  gratitude  to 
him.  He  should  ascribe  to  him  supreme  power  and 
privilege  in  the  society  about  to  be  instituted !  Never- 
theless, all  that  is  said  admits  of  being  translated  into 
impersonal  language ;  nor  is  the  sense  clear  till  this  has 
been  done.  Jesus  then  gave  utterance  to  three  great 
truths :  first,  that  the  Church  to  be  founded  was  to  be 
Christian,  or  to  put  it  otherwise,  that  the  person  of  the 
Pounder  was  of  fundamental  importance ;  second,  that  as 
such  it  should  be  practically  identical  with  the  kingdom 
of  God  He  had  hitherto  preached ;  third,  that  in  this 
Church  the  righteousness  of  the  kingdom  should  find  its 
home.  The  first  truth  He  taught  when  He  said  to 
Peter :  "  Thou  art  Peter,  and  on  this  rock  I  will  build 
My  Church."     The   sample  showed  the  quality   of  the 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH.  263 

edifice.  Peter,  the  first  stone,  was  a  man  who  beheved 
Jesus  to  be  the  Christ,  the  revealer  of  the  Father,  the 
prototype  of  Sonship,  and  who  had  received  this  faith  as 
a  revelation  from  heaven.  To  say  that  he  was  to  be  laid 
as  the  foundation  of  a  new  spiritual  building,  was  to  say 
in  effect  that  that  building  should  consist  of  men  receiving 
from  the  same  source,  and  holding  firmly,  the  same  faith. 
In  other  words,  the  new  society  was  to  be  Christian, 
confessing  Christ's  name,  animated  by  His  Spirit,  receiv- 
ing Him  at  once  as  revealed  by  the  Father  and  as 
revealer  of  the  Father ;  the  Son  of  Man  who  was  pre- 
eminently the  Son  of  God,  and  who  thoroughly  knew 
God  and  could  declare  Him.  To  say  of  the  Church 
that  it  is  Christian,  is  to  utter  a  truism  now ;  but  it  w^as 
not  so  then.  The  sacred  historian  of  the  apostolic 
Church,  while  passing  over  many  events  of  importance, 
took  care  to  note  when  the  disciples  of  Jesus  were  first 
called  Christians.^  In  like  manner  we  ought  to  regard 
it  as  an  eventful  moment  in  the  life  of  Jesus  when  He 
said :  I  mean  to  found  a  new  society,  and  it  shall  be  in 
character  Christian ;  its  roison  cVitre  will  be  to  confess 
me  as  Christ,  the  object  of  its  faith  and  love,  and  the 
satisfier  of  all  its  religious  wants.  This  He  said  when 
He  spoke  the  words :  "  On  this  rock  will  I  build  My 
Church."  And  this  commonplace  truth  is  the  truth 
above  all  to  be  laid  to  heart.  The  question  of  questions 
for  the  Church  is  not  who  is  primate,  or  any  question  of 
the  like  kind,  but  how  far  is  it  Christian  in  faith  and 
life  ?  Lacking  Christianity,  an  ecclesiastical  society, 
whether  acknowledging  Peter's  primacy  or  repudiating 
1  Acts  xi.  26. 


264  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

it,  is  a  community  against  which  the  gates  of  hell  shall 
prevail,  nay,  have  already  prevailed. 

The  second  truth,  that  the  new  Christian  society 
should  be  practically  identical  with  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  Jesus  declared  when  He  said :  "  I  will  give  unto 
thee  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven."  These  keys 
and  what  they  are,  and  the  power  to  use  them  and  what 
it  imports,  and  who  may  wield  it,  have  been  the  subject 
of  endless  controversy,  a  horror  to  think  of,  with  which 
I  have  no  inclination  to  intermeddle.  Nor  have  I  any 
call  to  do  so,  for  in  my  humble  opinion  the  "  power  of 
the  keys,"  in  the  ecclesiastical  sense  of  the  expression, 
was  not  in  all  Christ's  thoughts.  His  purpose  was  not 
to  determine  with  whom  lay  the  power  authoritatively 
to  admit  into  or  exclude  from  the  Church  assumed  to 
be  identical  with  the  kingdom  of  God,  but  rather  to 
indicate  the  connection  between  the  Church  and  the 
kingdom,  and  the  conditions  under  which  the  one  might 
be  identified  with  the  other.  In  promising  to  Peter  the 
keys  of  the  kingdom.  He  meant  to  say  that  a  society  of 
men  cordially  joining  in  his  confession,  calling  Jesus 
Lord  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  was  the  ideal  of  the  kingdom 
realized.  Such  a  declaration  was  to  be  expected  from 
Him.  He  had  been  speaking  all  along  of  a  kingdom  of 
God  to  be  sought  as  the  chief  good ;  He  *  had  taught 
many  truths  relating  to  the  kingdom ;  He  had  indicated 
very  distinctly  where  it  was  not  to  be  found,  viz.  in  the 
religious  world  of  Pharisaism.  But  He  had  not  hitherto 
assigned  to  it  a  positive  locality.  He  had  left  the 
heavenly  commonwealth  in  the  clouds  or  in  the  air,  and 
had  not  brought  it  down  to  the  earth  and  given  to  it 


THE  KINGDOM  AKD  THE  CHUKCH.  265 

there  a  local  habitation  and  a  name.  !N"ow  at  length  He 
acknowledges  the  lack,  and  supplies  what  was  needed  to 
complete  His  doctrine  of  the  kingdom ;  saying  in  effect : 
I  am  the  Kingdom ;  in  Me  Fatherhood  and  Sonship 
meet ;  those  who  confess  Me  form  a  brotherhood  in 
which  all  the  blessings  of  the  kingdom  are  enjoyed. 

In  subordination  to  this  general  truth,  Jesus,  by  the 
words  now  under  consideration,  recognised  the  import- 
ance of  Peter,  and  (of  course)  of  his  brother  disciples, 
as  sources  of  knowledge  concerning  Himself.  In  this 
connection  the  first  apostles  of  the  faith  performed  a 
function  in  w^hich  they  can  haA^e  no  successors.  They 
were  the  companions  of  the  Church's  Head  and  Lord, 
were  intimately  acquainted  with  His  doctrine,  had  been 
deeply  imbued  with  His  spirit,  and  were  thus  qualified 
to  convey  to  the  world  at  least  an  approximately  true 
reflection  of  His  image.  In  a  very  real  and  important 
sense  the  key  of  knowledge  was  committed  to  them, 
whereby  they  opened  the  kingdom  of  heaven  to  the  faith 
of  men. 

The  identity  of  Church  and  kingdom  is  not  absolute 
but  relative  only.  The  two  categories  do  not  entirely 
coincide,  even  when  the  Church  as  a  visible  society  is 
all  it  ought  to  be ;  its  members  all  truly  Christian  in 
faith  and  life.  The  kingdom  is  the  larger  category.  It 
embraces  all  who  by  the  key  of  a  true  knowledge  of  the 
historical  Christ  are  admitted  within  its  portals ;  but 
also  many  more,  the  children  of  the  Father  in  every 
land  who  have  unconsciously  loved  the  Christ  in  the 
person  of  His  representatives,  the  poor,  the  suffering,  the 
sorrowful.      For  such  no  apostle  or  church-ofhcer  opens 


266  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  door ;  the  Son  of  Man  Himself  admits  them  into  the 
kingdom  prepared  for  them  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world. ^ 

The  third  truth — that  in  the  new  society  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  kingdom  should  be  realized — Jesus  taught 
when  He  said :  "  Whatsoever  thou  shalt  bind  on  earth 
shall  be  bound  in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt 
loose  on  earth  shall  be  loosed  in  heaven."  Translated 
into  abstract  lanfruaoje,  this  amounts  to  a  declaration  that 
the  moral  judgment  of  the  Church  about  to  be  founded 
shall  be  sound,  wholesome,  in  all  its  actings  in  accard- 
ance  with  eternal  truth.  Such  a  spirit  of  wisdom  and 
understanding  shall  pervade  its  membership  that  they 
shall  know  instinctively  what  to  do  and  what  to  avoid. 
The  representative  men  at  the  head  will  give  right 
directions  as  to  conduct,  and  the  enlightened  conscience 
of  the  community  will  accept  and  enforce  their  counsels. 
That  will  be  declared  to  be  right  which  is  right  in  God's 
sight  and  in  the  divine  kingdom,  nothing  will  be  declared 
to  be  wrong  which  is  lawful  and  commendable.  In  other 
words,  the  state  of  matters  in  the  new  society  will  be 
exactly  the  reverse  of  that  which  prevailed  in  Eabbindom. 
The  Eabbis  to  a  very  large  extent  bound  what  should  be 
loosed,  and  loosed  what  should  be  bound.  They  per- 
mitted what  was  sinful,  they  forbade  what  might  be 
done  without  sin,  and  they  enjoined  many  things  which 
might  very  reasonably  be  disregarded.  Speaking  gene- 
rally, their  laws  and  penalties  were  directed  against  the 
wrong  men  and  the  wrong  practices.  Under  their 
regime  bad  men,  hypocrites,  were  likely  to  prosper,  and 
1  Matt.  XXV.  34.     Vide  cliap.  xiv. 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH.  267 

good  men  were  in  danger  of  judgment.  The  godless, 
wearing  a  cIogJv  of  religion,  were  admitted  within  the 
pale,  and  the  saints  were  thrust  out.  There  can  be 
little  doubt  that  Jesus  had  the  scribe -ruled  religious 
world  of  Israel  in  His  view  when  He  uttered  the  words 
I  now  comment  on,  and  meant  to  hint  at  a  radical 
contrast.  Of  the  righteousness  of  the  scribes  He  had 
said  that  it  stood  in  no  relation  to  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  bore  no  correspondence  to  its  righteousness, 
formed  no  preparation  for  citizenship  therein.  Of  the 
holy  commonwealth  which  is  to  bear  His  name  He 
affirms  the  reverse.  Eabbinism,  He  says  in  effect,  has 
utterly  failed  to  realize  the  moral  ideal ;  nascent  Chris- 
tendom will  be  a  more  successful  attempt. 

The  prediction,  however,  is  not  unconditional.  It 
goes  on  the  assumption  that  the  faith  of  the  Church  will 
continue  to  be  of  the  same  character  as  Peter's,  not  in 
the  letter  merely  or  chiefly,  but  in  spirit,  a  revelation  to 
the  soul  from  heaven,  not  a  tradition  of  flesh  and  blood. 
If  ever  the  traditional  principle  should  enter  the  Church 
there  would  be  no  guarantee  against  Eabbinism,  in  new 
forms,  reinvading  with  all  its  blindness  and  perversity. 
Was  there  any  risk  in  that  direction  ?  Great  risk. 
The  spirit  of  tradition  can  manifest  itself  in  connection 
with  every  conceivable  creed  or  religion ;  and  the  usual 
course  of  religions  is  to  begin  in  the  spirit  and  end  in 
the  flesh,  to  originate  in  inspiration  and  terminate  in 
custom.  Peter  did  not,  and  could  not,  receive  his  faith 
in  Jesus  as  Christ  from  tradition  or  custom,  for  all  the 
voices  of  that  kind  cried  out :  This  cannot  be  the  Christ ; 
He  is  an  unholy  man,  a  law-breaker,  a  blasphemer,  a 


268  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

glutton,  a  drunkard,  a  "  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners  ;  " 
or  at  best  a  good  man  fatally  disqualified  for  being  the 
Messiah  by  indifference  to  legitimate  patriotic  aspirations. 
But  we  can  call  Jesus  Lord  and  Christ  otherwise  than 
through  the  Holy  Ghost ;  when  Christendom  grew  to 
be  a  great  fact  many  did.  Yfhen  this  happens  much 
that  at  first  was  avowedly  and  manifestly  antagonistic 
to  Christ  may  be  associated  with  His  name ;  Kabbinism 
may  enter  into  the  Church  and  Christianity  may  be 
driven  out. 

Christ  was  not  unaware  of  the  risk  to  which  the  new 
experiment  at  realizing  the  ideal  of  a  divine  kingdom 
was  exposed.  He  revealed  His  anxiety  when  He  said  to 
His  disciples :  ''  Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth ;  but  if  the 
salt  have  lost  its  savour,  wherewith  shall  it  be  salted  ? " 
He  had  before  His  eyes  the  tragic  result  of  a  past 
experiment,  and  He  feared  lest  a  similar  fate  should 
befall  the  one  wdth  which  His  own  name  was  to  be 
associated.  "  The  old  election,"  He  meant  to  say,  "  has 
become  a  savourless  salt  through  lack  of  genuine 
righteousness ;  see  that  the  new  one  go  not  the  same 
way."  He  did  His  utmost  to  prevent  the  result  by 
subjecting  to  a  wholesome  discipline  the  men  on  whom 
so  much  was  to  depend,  at  least  in  the  initial  stage  of 
the  Church's  history.  There  are  traces  in  the  Gospel 
records  of  special  pains  taken  with  this  view  after 
the  time  when  the  subject  of  the  Church  was  first 
mentioned.  Perhaps  the  warning  against  savourless 
salt,  though  occurring  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  as 
reported  by  the  first  evangelist,  belongs  to  this  period. 
Mark  introduces  it  very  appropriately  as  a  part  of  the 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHUECH.  2G9 

admonitions  addressed  to  the  twelve  in  connection  with 
their  first  dispute  concerning  places  of  distinction.^  It 
is  certain,  at  all  events,  that  from  the  time  the  spirit  of 
ambition  began  to  manifest  itself  in  the  disciple-circle, 
Jesus  strove  to  make  sure  that  the  future  apostles  should 
have  salt  in  themselves.  By  the  manner  in  which  He 
met  the  demand  for  the  temple-tax  He  gave  them  a 
lesson  in  meekness ;  ^  through  a  little  child  He  taught 
them  humility ;  ^  from  the  anecdote  of  the  exorcist, 
related  by  John,  He  drew  the  moral  of  tolerance ;  ^  by 
directions  as  to  the  mode  of  dealing  with  an  offending 
brother  He  urged  the  importance  of  taking  all  possible 
pains  to  prevent  total  and  final  alienation ;  ^  by  a 
promise  of  His  presence  He  sought  to  foster  the  spirit 
of  fellowship  in  prayer;^  by  the  parable  of  The  Un- 
mercifid  Servant  He  enforced  the  duty  of  forgiveness/ 
On  another  occasion,  by  the  parable  of  The  Hours,  He 
chastised  the  spirit  of  self-complacency,  and  by  reference 
to  His  own  example  initiated  ambitious  aspirants  to 
greatness  into  the  mystery  of  honour  gained  by  lowly 
service.^  At  a  still  later  time  He  warned  the  multitude 
and  the  twelve  at  once  against  servile  subjection  to,  and 
against  arrogant  assumption  of,  authority,  saying  :  "  Call 
no  man  your  father  upon  the  earth ;  neither  be  ye  called 
masters ; "  ^  so  guarding  against  the  return  of  that 
Eabbinical  dominion  over  faith  and  conduct  which  He 
was  in  the  act  of  denouncing. 

1  Mark  ix.  50.  2  ]yxatt.  xvii.  24.  ■''  Matt,  xviii.  21. 

4  Mark  ix.  38-40  ;  Luke  ix.  50.  ^  Matt,  xviii.  15-17. 

c  Matt,  xviii.  19,  20.  '   Matt,  xviii.  21-35. 

8  Matt.  XX.  1-28.  9  Matt,  xxiii.  9,  10. 


270  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

Such  was  the  contribution  of  Jesus  towards  the  shap- 
ing of  the  future  character  of  His  Church.  He  provided 
for  it  no  ecclesiastical  constitution,  issued  no  authoritative 
instructions  concerning  forms  of  church  government, 
clerical  offices  and  orders,  or  even  worship.  These  He 
left  to  be  determined  by  the  self-organizing  life  of  the 
society.  He  concerned  Himself  with  the  spirit,  believing 
that  if  that  was  right  all  would  be  right.  He  taught 
the  apostles  humility,  brotherly  equality,  charity,  patience, 
concord  ;  and  for  the  rest  left  them  to  their  discretion. 
Neither  of  the  three  forms  which  ecclesiastical  organiza- 
tion has  assumed  is  either  justified  or  condemned  by  His 
instructions.  Prelacy  is  possible  under  Presbytery, 
humility  is  compatible  with  Episcopal  dignity,  and 
catholicity  is  not  irreconcilable  with  Congregationalism. 

Notwithstanding  all  His  care,  the  evils  dreaded  by  the 
Founder  of  the  Church  made  their  appearance.  Ptabbin- 
ism  reinvaded,  priestcraft  crept  in,  legalism  resumed  its 
malign  dominion  in  the  shape  of  salvation  by  sacraments 
or  by  dogmatic  othodoxy,  endless  divisions,  alienations,  and 
contentions  ensued,  making  the  history  of  the  Church  a 
tragic,  humiliating,  disenchanting  tale.  As  in  view  of 
the  evils  that  are  in  the  world  we  are  tempted  to  ask, 
Why  did  God  create  man  ?  so  in  presence  of  the  evils 
that  have  come  into  existence  in  the  course  of  ecclesias- 
tical history  we  are  tempted  to  ask.  Why  did  Christ 
create  the  Church  ?  We  certainly  cannot  say  that  He 
acted  in  ignorance  of  what  was  to  happen.  He  knew 
that  there  was  not  only  a  risk,  but  a  certainty  of  evil 
developing  itself  within  the  Church ;  He  even  predicted 
in  outline,  as  we  shall  see,  its  chequered  history.     The 


THE  KINGDOM  AND  THE  CHURCH.  271 

promise    that    the   gates    of    Hades  should  not  prevail 
against  it,  is  neither   an    indication   that    He    laboured 
under  a  delusion  nor  a  guarantee  against  failure.      The 
promise  or  prophecy,  as  already  hinted,  is  conditional. 
The  Church  will  stand  if  the  faith  of  its  members  con- 
tinue to  be  of  the  right  quality.      But  why  then  enter  on 
the  enterprise  ?     Why  lay  the  foundation  of  this  build- 
ing ?      In   the  first  place,  because  the  thing  had  to  be. 
A    powerful  religious  impulse   once   communicated   will 
run  its  course ;  it  cannot  be  prevented  from  taking  its 
place  in  history  as  an  institution.      In  the  second  place, 
because  it  was  good  on  the  whole.     The  Christian  Church 
gave  to  the  spirit  of  Christ  a  body  ;  to  the  light  of  Christ, 
an  atmosphere.     It  brought  down  to  this  earth  the  city 
of  God,  whose  presence  has  surely  conferred  many  benefits 
on  mankind.      Since  its  descent  from  heaven  the  celestial 
city  has  lost  much  of  its  beauty,  could  not  help  losing, 
for  all  historical  realizations  of  divine  ideals  (save  one — • 
the  perfect  Man  !)  are  necessarily  imperfect.     At  times 
the  spiritual  Salem  has  resembled  certain  terrestrial  cities 
known    to    us    as    they    appear    in    the   time    of    frost, 
enveloped  in  a  grimy  fog  which  shuts  out  the  sun  and 
blue  sky  visible  in  the   surrounding  country.      At  such 
unhappy    periods    the   question    suggests   itself,    Is    the 
Church  of  any  use ;  were  it  not  well  that  it  perished,  that 
Christianity  might  the  better  thrive  ?      Then,  instead  of 
claiming  for  the  Church  that  within  it  alone  is  salvation 
to   be    found,  earnest    men    are    more   inclined    to    ask 
whether  salvation  is  to  be  found  in  it  at  all,  and  does  not 
rather   consist   in  escaping  from  its  influence.      A  good 
many  are  asking  such  revolutionary  questions  even  now, 


272  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

and  it  is  foolish  for  Churchmen  simply  to  be  shocked, 
and  to  characterize  them  as  profane.  The  Church  is 
only  a  means  to  an  end.  It  is  good  only  in  so  far 
as  it  is  Christian.  There  is  no  merit  or  profit  in 
mere  ecclesiasticism.  Whatever  reveals  the  true  Christ 
is  of  value  and  will  live.  Whatever  hides  Christ, 
be  it  pope,  priest,  or  presbyter,  sacraments  or  ecclesias- 
tical misrule,  is  pernicious,  and  must  pass  away.  But  we 
may  hope  that  there  will  always  be  enough  of  Christ's 
spirit  in  the  society  which  bears  His  name  to  keep  it 
from  becoming  utterly  savourless,  and  to  bring  about 
such  reforms  as  may  be  necessary  to  make  it  serve  the 
end  for  which  it  was  instituted.  Should  this  hope  be 
disappointed,  then  the  visible  Church,  as  we  know  it, 
must  and  will  pass  away,  leaving  the  spirit  of  Christ 
free  room  to  make  a  new  experiment,  under  happier 
auspices,  at  self-realization.  To  be  enthusiastic  about  the 
Church  in  its  present  condition  is  impossible,  to  hope  for 
its  future  is  not  impossible ;  but  if  it  were,  there  is  no 
cause  for  despair.  Christ  will  ever  remain,  the  same 
yesterday,  to-day,  and  for  ever ;  and  the  kingdom  of  God 
will  remain,  a  kingdom  that  cannot  be  moved. 


CHAPTEE  XII. 

THE  PAROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA. 

There  is  no  subject  on  which  it  is  more  difficult  to 
ascertain  the  teaching  of  Christ  than  that  which  relates  to 
the  future  of  the  kingdom.  The  difficulty  arises  in  part 
from  the  fact  that  there  are  two  classes  of  texts  bearing 
on  the  topic,  one  of  which  by  obvious  implication,  if  not 
by  direct  statement,  seems  to  assign  to  the  kingdom,  as  an 
earthly  institution,  a  lengthened  history,  in  the  course  of 
which  it  is  to  pass  through  a  gradual  process  of  develop- 
ment ;  while  the  other  seems  not  less  plainly  to  predict 
the  speedy  approach  of  the  grand  consummation,  involving 
the  advent  of  Messiah,  the  setting  up  of  His  kingdom  in 
splendour,  the  separation  of  the  good  and  evil,  and  the 
allotment  to  each  of  their  respective  destinies.  Various 
methods  have  been  resorted  to  for  solving  the  problem 
presented  in  these  apparently  conflicting  oracles.  Some, 
admitting  the  equal  authenticity  of  the  two  sets  of  state- 
ments, and  denying  their  reconcilability,  maintain  that 
Jesus  had  not  a  uniform  manner  of  speaking  on  the  sub- 
ject, but  either  vacillated  in  opinion,  or  at  one  time  spoke 
His  own  sentiments,  and  at  another  accommodated  His 
utterances  to  existing  ideas  and  hopes.  Others,  also 
regarding  the  two  classes  of  texts  as  irreconcilable,  but 


274  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

not  believing  either  in  self-contradiction  or  in  illegitimate 
accommodation  on  the  part  of  Jesus,  have  recourse  to  the 
expedient  of  treating  the  texts  which  foretell  a  speedy 
consummation  as  a  corrupt,  unauthentic  element  in  the 
evangelic  tradition,  and  accepting  as  genuine  those  only 
which  are  most  remote  from  the  apocalyptic  ideas  then 
current  among  the  Jews.  If  the  choice  lay  between 
these  two  views  I  should  certainly  adopt  in  preference 
the  latter  alternative  ;  for  it  is  a  priori  more  credible  that 
the  reporters  of  Christ's  words  concerning  the  future 
coloured  them  with  their  own  opinions,  than  that  the 
outlook  of  the  Master  was  as  limited  as  we  know  theirs 
to  have  been.  In  that  case  we  should  have  to  regard 
those  sayings  of  Jesus  which  give  to  the  kingdom  a 
lengthened  career  as  the  most  authentic  and  reliable 
words  preserved  pure  by  the  evangelists,  involuntarily 
and  in  spite  of  their  bias.  In  these  sayings  we  should, 
as  it  were,  see  the  morning  sun  of  the  Christian  era 
struggling  into  sight  through  the  mist  of  contemporary 
Jewish  eschatology.  I  trust,  however,  that  we  are  not 
shut  up  to  either  of  the  foregoing  alternatives.  In  that 
hope,  though  without  foregone  conclusions,  I  proceed  to 
look  at  the  two  classes  of  texts,  and  to  consider  how  far  they 
are  capable  of  being  reconciled.  I  begin  by  remarking 
that  the  mere  fact  of  Christ's  resolving  to  institute  a 
Church  raises  a  presumption  in  favour  of  the  view  that 
He  anticipated  for  the  kingdom,  not  consummation  by 
an  early  catastrophe,  but  a  lengthened  history.  Why 
set  about  building  an  edifice  on  rock  foundations,  and 
with  walls  strong  enough  to  defy  time,  if  the  end  was  to 
come  before  the  work  of  construction  had  been  well  begun  ? 


THE  PAROUSI.\  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA.  275 

Among  the  texts  which  point  in  the  same  direction  a 
foremost  place  is  due  to  those  in  which  we  find  the  king- 
dom associated  with  the  idea  of  growth,  with  which  the 
idea  of  early  catastophe  is  irreconcilable.  ^tTow  there  is 
a  whole  group  of  parables  in  which  the  kingdom  is 
represented  as  subject  to  the  law  of  growth  ;  those,  viz., 
in  which  it  is  compared  to  seed  —  the  parables  of 
The  Sower,  The  MHieat  and  Tares,  The  Mustard  Seed, 
and  The  Seed  growing  gradually.  The  last  of  the 
four  is  the  most  important ;  because  while  growth  is 
clearly  implied  in  all  the  rest,  the  express  design  of 
this  one  is  to  teach  that  the  kingdom  of  God  is  sub- 
ject to  the  law  of  gradual  growth  in  accordance  with  the 
analogy  of  nature.  The  parable  has  an  important 
application  to  the  divine  life  in  the  individual,  but  its 
applicability  to  the  kingdom  as  an  institution  will  not  be 
disputed.  From  it  we  learn,  therefore,  that  the  kingdom 
of  God,  as  a  historical  movement,  has  to  pass  through 
stages  at  a  rate  of  progress  so  slow  that  the  servants  of 
the  kingdom  will  cease  to  expect  the  consummation  forth- 
with, and  that  there  will  be  a  striking  contrast  between 
the  tedious  process  of  growth  and  the  sudden  oncoming 
of  the  harvest  when  the  grain  is  ripe  for  the  sickle. 
Catastrophe  is  recognised  in  connection  with  the  latter  : 
"  immediately  he  putteth  in  the  sickle ; "  but  it  is  cata- 
strophe coming  at  the  end  of  a  lengthened  development. 
The  significant  point  in  the  parable  is  the  description  of 
the  farmer's  habit  after  the  seed  is  sown.  He  sleeps  and 
rises  night  and  day.  He  knows  that  his  part  is  done,  and 
that  the  rest  must  be  left  to  the  soil ;  therefore  he  resigns 
himself  to  easy-minded  passivity,  leaving  the  earth    to 


276  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

bring  forth  of  itself.  He  knows  also  that  growth  cannot 
be  hastened  by  bustling  activity,  therefore  he  is  patient. 
He  knows  further  that  the  harvest  season  will  come 
eventually ;  he  has  faith  in  the  soil  and  the  seasons ; 
therefore  he  is  free  from  feverish  anxiety.  By  the 
parable  Jesus  taught  His  disciples  that  they  must  strive 
to  resemble  the  farmer  in  these  respects,  and  that  they 
should  have  need  and  opportunity  to  do  so  in  connection 
with  the  work  of  the  kingdom,  need  and  opportunity  for 
passivity,  patience,  and  faith.  The  mood  recommended  is 
not  indifference,  but  that  which  is  natural  to  one  inter- 
ested in  a  process  demanding  time  for  its  completion.  It 
is  the  opposite  of  the  mood  described  by  Paul  as  preva- 
lent in  the  Thessalonian  Church,  that,  viz.,  of  men  shaken 
in  mind  and  disturbed  to  distraction.^  The  cause  of  that 
disorder  was  the  notion  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  was  just 
at  hand.  The  radical  cure  for  it  is  Christ's  doctrine  of 
growth.  But  that  doctrine  the  apostolic  generation 
failed  to  grasp,  and  even  Paul  himself  but  imperfectly 
understood. 

A  second  important  group  of  texts  consists  of  those 
which  suggest  the  thought  of  a  delaijed  parousia.  These 
texts  do  not,  of  course,  like  those  containing  the  idea  of 
growth,  imply  a  lengthened  period  of  development. 
Their  significance  lies  in  this,  that  they  open  up  the 
question  as  to  a  plurality  of  senses  to  be  attached  to 
the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man ;  for  if  there  be  a  coming 
which  may  be  delayed,  tliere  is  also  a  coming,  as  we 
shall  see,  which  will  (certainly  take  place  within  a 
generation.  To  this  second  group  of  texts  belong  the 
^  2  Thess.  ii.  1,  2. 


THE  PAKOUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA.  277 

two  parables  which  inculcate  perseverance  in  prayer,  viz., 
The  Selfish  Neiyhhour  and  The  Unjust  Judge.  Apart  from 
the  connection  in  which,  in  Luke's  narrative,  the  former 
stands  with  the  Lord's  Prayer,  it  may  be  taken  for 
granted  that  in  exhorting  the  future  apostles  to  be  on 
their  guard  against  fainting  in  prayer,  Jesus  had  very 
specially  in  view  the  kingdom  which  He  ever  taught 
them  to  regard  as  the  supreme  object  of  desire.  He 
spoke  to  men  whom  He  assumed  to  be  ever  saying  in 
their  hearts,  "  Thy  kingdom  come."  It  is  thus  implied 
in  the  parable  that  the  kingdom  may  come  so  slowly,  so 
much  later  than  was  anticipated,  that  men  interested  in 
its  advancement  will  be  tempted  to  despondency.  This 
truth  comes  out  still  more  clearly  in  the  parable  of  the 
Unjust  Judge,  in  which  the  source  of  temptation  is  the 
delay  of  Providence  in  espousing  the  cause  of  those  who 
devote  their  lives  to  the  kingdom.  The  delay  is  so  long 
that  the  faithful  are  in  danger  of  losing  heart.  "  Never- 
theless, when  the  Son  of  Man  cometh  shall  He  find  faith 
in  the  earth."  When  the  Son  of  Man  comes  the  divine 
interest  in  the  cause  of  His  kingdom  will  be  manifest, 
and  the  prayers  of  the  saints  at  length  heard ;  but  so 
long  will  His  coming  be  deferred  that  faith  in  it  will 
almost  have  died  out,  even  among  the  most  devoted. 
Hope  deferred  will  have  made  their  hearts  sick,  and 
when  deliverance  comes  they  will  be  like  the  Israelites 
in  Babylon  when  recalled  from  captivity — like  men  that 
dream,  unable  to  believe  welcome  tidings,  because  to 
heavy  hearts  they  seem  too  good  to  be  true.  Some 
critics  see  in  the  last  two  verses  an  unauthentic  addition 
to  the  words  of  Jesus,  made  at  a  later  time  when  it  had 


278  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

become  evident  that  the  coming  of  the  Lord  was  not  to 
take  place  so  soon  as  had  been  anticipated.  Such  doubt, 
however  gratuitous,  has  this  value,  that  it  betrays  a 
feeling  that  delay  beyond  expectation  is  plainly  implied 
in  the  passage. 

A  deferred  parousia  is  implied  in  all  texts,  and  they 
are  not  few,  containing  exhortations  to  watch.  These 
exhortations  imply  two  things :  the  uncertainty  of  the 
parousia, — it  may  come  on  you  unawares,  therefore  be  ever 
ready, — and  a  risk  of  being  off  guard  arising  out  of  delay. 
That  such  delay  was  in  the  view  of  Jesus,  in  some  cases 
at  least,  is  beyond  question.  As  an  instance  may  be 
cited  the  counsel  to  watch,  at  the  close  of  the  parable  of 
The  Ten  Virgins,  in  which  the  situation  is  thus  described: 
"  While  the  bridegroom  tarried,  they  all  nodded  and 
slept."  -^  All,  the  wise  not  less  than  the  foolish ;  those 
virgins  young  and  eager,  and  in  full  sympathy  with  the 
occasion.  Long  delay  was  necessary  to  cast  an  eagerly 
expectant  Church  into  such  a  state  of  somnolency. 

The  parable  concerning  Tlie  Upper  Servant  playing  the 
tyrant  over  the  Inferior  Servants  in  the  absence  of  the 
Master  emphatically  points  the  same  moral.^  Luke  intro- 
duces it  in  a  very  appropriate  connection.  Interrogated 
in  reference  to  another  parable  enforcing  the  duty  of 
watching,  whether  it  was  meant  for  the  twelve  or  for 
the  multitude,  Jesus  spoke  this  second  parable  to  indicate 
the  temptations  to  which  men  occupying  higher  places  in 
the  kingdom  would  be  exposed  by  the  Master  delaying 
His  coming.  While  the  inferior  servant  is  represented 
as  simply  liable  to  fall  asleep  instead  of  watching,  the 
1  Matt.  XXV.  5.  -  Luke  xii.  42-46. 


THE  PAROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA.  279 

steward  of  the  house  is  conceived  as  in  danger  of  begin- 
ning to  play  the  tyrant  and  the  reveller.  Obviously  a 
process  of  demoralization  culminating  in  such  scandalous 
misbehaviour  demands  a  considerable  lapse  of  time.  The 
head  men  of  a  religious  community  cannot  be  thought  of 
as  falling  from  a  high  moral  level  of  fidelity  to  the  low 
condition  supposed  suddenly ;  we  are  rather  led  to  think 
of  a  slow  secular  process  of  declension  extending  over 
generations  or  even  centuries.  There  was,  indeed,  a 
certain  risk  of  demoralization  setting  in  at  the  close  of 
the  apostolic  age  as  soon  as  it  began  to  be  suspected 
that  the  day  of  the  Lord  was  not  to  come,  as  had  been 
generally  anticipated,  in  the  first  Christian  generation. 
Strained  expectation  of  a  speedy  coming  might  then  give 
place  to  scepticism  as  to  its  ever  coming,  leading  on  to 
utter  unbelief  and  moral  licence.  Some  traces  of  such  a 
reaction  occur  in  the  Second  Epistle  of  Peter,^  in  view  of 
which  one  might  be  disposed  to  regard  the  parable  now 
under  consideration  as  the  invention  of  a  later  time, 
embodying  cautions  suggested  by  ol^servation  of  the  evil 
consequences  of  disappointed  hope.  But  the  hypothesis  is 
refuted  by  the  simple  consideration  that  such  evil  conse- 
quences in  the  apostolic  age  were  confined  to  the  obscurer 
members  of  the  Church,  and  did  not  appear  among  those 
of  whom  the  steward  in  the  parable  is  the  natural  repre- 
sentative. There  were  no  facts  to  suggest  or  justify  so 
dark  a  picture  of  misbehaviour  among  the  office-bearers 
of  the  Church.  The  authenticity  of  the  parable  is  there- 
fore above  all  doubt,  and  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  one  of 
the  most  convincing  proofs  that  Christ  contemplated,  as 
1  2  Pet.  ii.  4. 


280  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

at  least  a  probability,  a  parousia  delayed  not  merely  a 
little  beyond  expectation,  but  even  indefinitely. 

A  third  group  of  texts  favouring  the  hypothesis  of  a 
Christian  era,  as  against  that  of  a  speedy  end  of  the 
world,  embraces  those  which  contain  or  suggest  the  idea 
of  a  Gentile  day  of  grace.  To  this  class  belongs  the  word 
spoken  in  the  house  of  Simon  the  leper,  in  which  it  is 
indirectly  declared  that  the  gospel  is  to  be  preached  in 
the  whole  world.^  Another  utterance  of  the  same  kind, 
still  more  explicit  in  its  terms,  occurs  in  the  great 
eschatological  discourse  as  recorded  by  the  same  two 
evangelists  who  have  preserved  the  former.  Matthew 
makes  Christ  say,  "  This  Gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be 
preached  in  all  the  world  for  a  witness  unto  all 
nations ; "  ^  Mark,  "  The  gospel  must  first  be  published 
among  all  nations."^  The  authenticity  of  this  saying 
has  been  questioned.  There  may  be  room  for  reasonable 
doubt  whether  it  has  its  proper  historical  place  in  the 
discourse  in  which  it  is  embedded ;  but  there  is  really 
no  ground  for  disputing  its  genuineness.  On  the  con- 
trary, the  very  variations  with  which  it  is  given  by  the 
two  evangelists  is  an  argument  in  favour  of  genuineness, 
as  either  pointing  to  two  independent  sources  of  informa- 
tion, or,  as  has  recently  been  suggested  by  Dr.  Abbott,  to 
independent  use  of  one  elliptical  document  whose  laconic 
phrases  might  easily  be  differently  construed  by  readers.'^ 
Weiss,  in  his  work  on  the  life  of  Jesus,  while  admitting 

1  Matt.  XX vi.  13  ;  Mark  xiv.  9. 

2  Matt.  xxiv.  14.  ^  Mark  xiii.  10. 

"*  The  Common  Tradition  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels,  Introduction, 
p.  xxxiii. 


THE  PAROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA.  281 

the  genuineness,  does  his  utmost  to  evacuate  the  saying 
of  significance,  and  to  reconcile  it  with  the  hypothesis 
that  Jesus  believed  and  thought  that  the  final  catastrophe 
would  happen  within  a  generation.  His  argument  is  to 
this  effect :  In  our  modern  sense  Jesus  never  thought  of 
His  work  as  for  the  world  in  general,  because  He  could 
only  think  of  it  in  the  form  which  the  Scripture  gave  to 
His  hand.  No  doubt  the  Gentiles  were  concerned  in  the 
Messianic  salvation,  and  a  single  generation  may  seem  a 
most  inadequate  time  to  allow  for  their  conversion.  But, 
in  the  first  place,  Jesus  was  ignorant  of  the  extent  of  the 
world,  just  as  Paul  was,  who  actually  thought  and  said 
that  the  gospel  had  already  been  preached  in  the  w^hole 
world.  Then,  and  above  all,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind 
that  though  Jesus  expected  to  get  some  converts  from 
heathendom,  yet  His  experience  of  disappointment  even 
among  a  prepared  people  left  little  room  for  hope  of 
extensive  conversions  among  unprepared  pagans.^  This 
train  of  thought  provokes  the  reflection  often  suggested 
by  this  author's  treatment  of  the  great  biography,  that 
while  Jesus  in  his  hands  is  officially  a  very  important 
person — the  Messiah,  He  is  a  very  commonplace  man, 
morally  and  intellectually.  The  comparison  between 
Jews  and  Gentiles  as  to  the  reception  of  the  gospel  is 
in  direct  contradiction  to  the  whole  spirit  of  Christ's 
teaching,  which  was  to  the  effect  that  the  last  might  be 
first,  that  publicans  and  sinners  were  more  likely  to 
receive  the  good  tidings  than  the  Pharisees,  the  babes 
than  the  wise  men ;  and  that  a  faith  might  be  forth- 
coming among  pagans,  the  like  of  which  was  not  to  be 
1  Das  Lehen  Jesu,  ii.  483-4. 


282  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

found  even  in  prepared,  privileged  Israel.  The  remark 
concerning  Christ's  ignorance  as  to  the  extent  of  the 
world,  even  if  true,  is  irrelevant.  Supposing  the  Gentile 
world  to  consist  of  the  nations  bordering  on  the  Mediter- 
ranean Sea,  the  question  is,  was  not  a  generation,  say 
forty  years,  an  utterly  inadequate  period  for  the  effective 
evangelization  of  even  so  limited  a  world  ?  Was  it  not 
mocking  the  Gentiles  to  offer  them  a  single  generation, 
when  Israel  had  had  many  centuries  ?  Could  the 
gospel  be  preached  to  them  in  that  short  time  for  a 
witness,  that  is,  as  a  basis  of  judgment,  that  all  men 
might  know  of  the  mercy  of  God  before  the  end  came — 
assuming  that  the  words  "  for  a  witness  "  are  to  be  con- 
nected with  the  preaching  to  the  Gentiles,  which  is 
doubtful,  Mark  connecting  them  rather  with  the  appear- 
ing of  the  apostles  before  rulers  and  kings  testifying  for 
Christ  and  against  their  oppressors.  There  is  something 
unsympathetic  in  the  tone  of  Christ's  words  as  reported 
by  Matthew,  which  inclines  one  to  prefer  Mark's  version 
as  the  more  accurate.  Christ  would  have  His  gospel 
preached  to  the  pagans  not  merely  for  a  witness,  as  if  to 
justify  their  condemnation,  unbelief  being  taken  for 
granted  ;  but  rather  for  their  salvation,  and  in  the  hope 
that  many  would  gladly  accept  the  boon  offered.  It  is  a 
mere  unfounded  assertion  to  say  that  Christ  did  not  and 
could  not  seriously  entertain  the  thought  of  a  thorough- 
going evangelization  of  the  Gentiles,  but  at  most  only 
contemplated  the  throwing  of  a  few  crumbs  to  the  pagan 
dogs  after  the  children  of  the  house  of  Israel  had  been 
filled.  Why  not  He  as  well  as  Paul  ?  It  is  probably 
nearer  the  truth  to  say  that  the  mind  of  the  Master,  in 


THE  PAROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  EEA.  283 

this  respect  as  in  others,  was  wider  in  its  range  of  ideas 
than  the  apostle's,  and  that  He  had  in  view  a  leavening 
of  the  whole  lump  of  humanity  by  the  gospel  of  the 
kingdom  to  a  degree  of  completeness  whereof  Paul,  as  he 
made  his  hasty  missionary  excursions  hither  and  thither 
in  Asia  and  Europe,  had  no  conception.  It  is  not  clearly 
indicated  in  the  parable  of  the  leaven  that  the  lump  is 
the  world  at  laroje,  but  the  method  on  which  the  kincrdom 
works,  wherever  it  goes,  is  explained.  If  the  kingdom  is 
to  go  into  the  Gentile  world  it  will  work  there  as  a  leaven 
as  well  as  in  Palestine.  And  the  method  demands  time, 
its  manner  of  working  is  slow  but  sure  ;  its  process  needs 
not  a  generation,  but  an  era  for  its  accomplishment.  The 
Pauline  evangelist  Luke,  in  his  version  of  the  eschato- 
logical  discourse,  uses  a  significant  phrase  which  indicates 
a  remarkable  appreciation  of  the  requirements  as  to  time 
of  the  work  of  Gentile  evangelization.  It  is  "  the  times 
of  the  Gentiles  "  (Kaipol  iOvMv)}  It  is  the  equivalent,  in 
his  account,  of  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  to  Gentiles 
spoken  of  by  Matthew  and  Mark.  It  points  to  a  Gentile 
day  of  gTace  analogous  to  Israel's  time  of  gracious 
visitation,  to  which  Jesus  alluded  in  His  lament  over 
Jerusalem.^  As  soon  as  the  two  things  are  brought 
together  we  feel  the  absurdity  of  the  notion  that  Gentile 
opportunity  was  to  be  limited  to  a  generation.  The 
Jewish  kairos  lasted  for  many  centuries — from  the  con- 
quest of  Canaan  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  now 
impending.  And  the  kairos  of  the  great  Gentile  world, 
how  long  is  it  to  last  ?  For  forty  or  fifty  years  ? 
Verily  a  crumb  for  pagan  dogs  !  It  is  not  necessary  to 
1  Luke  xxi.  24.  ^  Luke  xix.  44. 


284  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

assume  that  the  expression  I  comment  on  was  coined 
by  Jesus.  If  Luke  invented  it  he  thereby  simply  put 
into  felicitous  words  the  inevitable  inference  from  Gentile 
evangelization,  viz.  that  Gentile  opportunities  must  be 
commensurate  with  the  magnitude  of  the  work,  and  in 
analogy  with  God's  way  of  dealing  with  men  in  grace  as 
revealed  in  the  past  history  of  Israel. 

In  passing  now  to  the  other  class  of  texts  which  seem 
to  teach  that  the  final  consummation  was  to  come  very 
soon,  I  may  cite  as  a  first  sample  a  saying  of  Jesus  pre- 
served by  Matthew  in  his  account  of  the  instructions 
given  to  the  disciples  in  connection  with  the  Galilean 
mission :  "  When  they  persecute  you  in  this  city  flee  ye 
to  the  next ;  for  verily  I  say  unto  you,  Ye  shall  not  have 
gone  through  the  cities  of  Israel  till  the  Son  of  Man  be 
come."  ^  Assuming  that  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man 
and  the  end  of  the  world  coincide,  the  plain  meaning  of 
this  statement  is,  that  the  wind-up  of  the  world's  history 
was  to  take  place  in  the  lifetime  of  the  apostles,  and 
while  they  were  engaged  in  their  evangelistic  enterprise 
among  their  countrymen.  But  is  the  assumption 
correct  ?  There  is  room  for  reasonable  doubt  on  the 
point.  Looking  into  the  connection  of  thought  to  which 
the  text  belongs,  we  observe  that  Jesus  has  in  view  some- 
thing which  specially  concerns  the  Jewish  nation.  The 
parousia  is  referred  to  as  a  reason  why  the  disciples  being 
persecuted  in  one  city  should  flee  to  another ;  and  the 
thought  intended  seems  to  be :  You  need  not  hesitate  to 
flee  from  any  city  which  does  not  give  you  welcome,  for 
it  is  desirable  that  all  the  cities  of  Israel  should  hear  the 
1  Matt.  X.  23. 


THE  PAKOUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN-  ERA.  285 

gospel  of  the  kingdom,  and  however  diligent  you  may  be, 
you  will  not  have  time  to  go  over  them  all  before  Israel's 
crisis  comes.  The  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  thus 
appears,  at  least  in  this  instance,  to  signify  the  coming 
of  Israel's  judgment  -  day,  involving  destruction  to  the 
impenitent  portion  of  the  nation.  This  inference  is 
wholly  independent  of  the  question  whether  Matthew 
has  given  this   saying  in   its  proper  historical  position.  . 

Some  portions  of  Matthew's  mission  discourse  appear  in  / 
the  eschatological  discourse  as  reported  by  the  other 
evangelists,^  and  even  Matthew  himself  repeats  certain 
sayings  already  given  in  the  earlier  discourse  in  his 
version  of  the  later ;  ^  and  it  is  not  improbable  that  the 
saying  now  under  consideration  really  belongs  to  the 
closing  period  of  Christ's  life.  All  that  is  necessary  for 
our  purpose  is  that  the  saying,  at  whatever  time  uttered, 
had  reference  to  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  in  Israel  by 
the  apostles.  This,  indeed,  has  been  denied,  and  the 
text  thus  construed :  Ye  shall  not  have  finished  fleeing 
from  city  to  city  till  the  Son  of  Man  be  come ;  ^  the 
motive  for  the  interpretation  being  a  desire  to  eliminate 
all  reference  to  Israel's  judgment-day.  But  this  seems 
a  very  forced  construction.  It  is  intrinsically  probable 
that  Christ  referred  to  His  coming  as  a  reason  for 
diligence  in  the  work  of  preaching  the  gospel  to  Israel ; 
and  it  could  be  that  only  on  the  supposition  that  His 
coming  meant  the  judgment-day  of  Israel. 

1  Compare  Matt.  x.  16-22  with  Mark  xiii.  9-13,  Luke  xxi.  12-19. 

2  Matt.  X.  22  ;  cf.  Matt,  xxiii.  9,  13. 

3  So  Piinjer,  "  Die  Wiederkunftsreden  Jesu,"  in  Hilgenfeld's  Zcit- 
schrift,  1878. 


286  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

The  same  reference  to  the  judgment  of  Israel  seems 
to  have  been  in  Christ's  mind  when  He  uttered  the 
words :  "  There  be  some  standing  here  that  shall  not 
taste  of  death  till  they  see  the  Son  of  Man  coming  in 
His  kingdom."  ^  The  section  of  the  history  to  which 
the  text  belongs  begins  with  the  account  of  a  request 
made  by  certain  Pharisees  for  a  sign  which  led  Jesus 
to  return  an  answer  tinged  with  the  melancholy  cha- 
racteristic of  all  His  replies  to  requests  of  that  sort. 
He  saw  in  the  spirit  which  prompted  these  demands  a 
sure  proof  that  the  Jewish  people  were  approaching 
their  doom,  and  also  an  ominous  indication  of  the  fate 
which  awaited  Himself.  Therefore  He  told  the  sign- 
seekers  that  no  sign  should  be  given  them  but  that  of  the 
prophet  Jonah,  meaning  probably  to  set  the  reception 
given  by  Nineveh  to  Jonah's  preaching  in  contrast  to 
the  reception  given  by  Israel  to  Himself,  and  to  hint 
that  the  doom  Nineveh  had  escaped  by  repentance 
would  come  on  her.  The  encounter  with  unbelief 
troubled  His  spirit  and  coloured  all  His  thoughts  for 
a  while.  It  cast  Him  into  a  brooding  mood  as  they 
rowed  Him  across  the  lake,  and  prompted  the  abrupt 
word  of  warning :  "  Take  heed  and  beware  of  the  leaven 
(jf  the  Pharisees  and  of  the  Sadducees."  ^  It  led  Him 
to  think  of  His  approaching  death,  and  to  feel  that  it 
was  now  time  to  inform  His  followers  of  what  was 
coming.  It  led  Him,  finally,  to  speak  of  His  coming  in 
His  kingdom  still  with  conscious  reference  to  the  wicked 
and  adulterous  generation,  and  with  this  thought  in 
His  mind :  then  parties  will  change  places ;  the  Son  of 
1  Matt.  xvi.  28.  ^  Matt.  xvi.  6. 


THE  PAROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA.  287 

]Man,  soon  to  be  crucified,  will  then  be  Judge ;  and  this 
people,  at  whose  hands  He  is  about  to  suffer,  will  receive 
its  doom. 

These  texts,  thus  explained,  suggest  the  thought  that 
there  may  be  more  than  one  kind  of  coming  of  the  Son 
of  Man  referred  to  in  the  words  of  Jesus.'  Students  of 
the  Gospels  not  specially  biassed  in  favour  of  orthodoxy, 
such  as  Holtzmann,  have  recognised  three  distinct  com- 
ings :  an  cqjoccdyptic  coming  at  the  end  of  the  world,  a 
historical  coming  at  any  great  crisis,  as  in  the  destruction 
of  the  Jewish  state,  and  a  dynamical  coming  in  the 
hearts  of  believers.^  The  parousia  assumes  this  third 
aspect  chiefly  in  the  fourth  Gospel,  but  traces  of  it  are 
not  wanting  in  the  Synoptics,  as  in  the  saying :  "  The 
kingdom  of  God  cometh  not  with  observation,  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  within  you ; "  and  in  the  promise  : 
"  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  My  name, 
there  am  I  in  the  midst  of  them."  ^  The  three  senses 
are  all  intelligible  and  important,  and  it  is  a  i^riori  per- 
fectly credible  that  they  were  all  present  to  the  mind  of 
Jesus.  Such  a  free  plastic  manner  of  conceiving  the 
parousia  is  quite  in  accordance  with  His  ideal  poetic 
habit  of  thought.  We  have  another  instance  of  His 
free  treatment  of  prophetic  ideas  in  the  identification 
of  John  the  Baptist  with  Elijah.  "  If  ye  are  willing  to 
receive  it,"  He  said,  "  this  is  Elijah  which  is  to  come."  ^ 
Why  should  He  not  also  say  in  like  manner,  in  reference 
to  the  judgment  of  Israel,  preparing  the  way  for  Gentile 
Christianity,  or  to  His  spiritual  presence  in  believers,  If 

^  Die  Syiwptischen  Evangclien,  S.  409. 

2  Luke  xvii.  20,  21  :  Matt,  xviii.  20.  »  Matt.  xi.  14. 


288  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

ye  will  receive  it,  this  is  the  promised  coming  of  the  Son 
of  Man  ?  Critics  are  not  willing  to  receive  it ;  but 
neither  were  the  people  of  Israel  willing  to  receive  the 
Baptist  as  Elijah.  Elijah  came,  and  they  "  knew  him 
not,  but  did  unto  him  whatsoever  they  listed."  ^ 

The  most  important  and  difficult  text  remains  to  be 
considered,  that  at  the  close  of  the  great  eschatological 
discourse  containing  this  solemn  declaration  :  "  Verily  I 
say  unto  you,  This  generation  shall  not  pass  away  till  all 
these  things  be  accomplished."  ^  This  text,  as  it  stands 
in  Matthew's  narrative,  seems  conclusively  to  prove  that 
Jesus  really  did  expect  the  final  consummation  to  happen 
within  the  lifetime  of  His  contemporaries.  For  the 
discourse  on  the  Mount  of  Olives,  as  reported  by  the 
first  evangelist,  takes  the  form  of  a  reply  to  three 
questions  apparently  assumed  by  the  questioners  to  be 
equivalent  in  import,  of  which  the  first  referred  to  the 
destruction  of  the  temple  which  had  just  been  predicted, 
the  second  to  the  sign  of  Christ's  coming,  and  the  third 
to  the  end  of  the  age  or  world.^  The  apocalypse  vouch- 
safed consists  of  three  parts :  the  first  containing  a 
description  of  the  1:»irth-pangs,  the  things  which  are  to 
precede  the  crisis  of  Israel ;  *  the  second  being  occupied 
with  the  "  affliction  "  or  ^Xt\/rt9,  the  dread  visitation  of 
judgment  on  that  doomed  people;^  while  the  third 
describes  the  end,  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man,  which 
is  represented  as  taking  place  immediately  after  the 
OXiyjrc^.     The    coming    is    something    distinct   from    the 

^  Matt.  xvii.  12. 

'^  Matt  xxiv.  34  ;  Mark  xiii.  30  ;  Luke  xxi.  32. 

3  Matt.  xxiv.  3.  *  Matt.  xxiv.  4-14.  ^  Vers.  15-22. 


THE  TAEOUSIA  AND  THE  CHEISTIAN  ERA.  289 

OXiy^ri'^,  yet  it  follows  closely  on  the  back  of  it.  It  is 
the  great  final  coming,  to  be  accompanied  by  the  judg- 
ment of  the  unbelieving  world,  and  the  gathering  together 
of  the  elect  from  the  four  winds  of  heaven  for  a  happy 
meeting  with  the  Lord ;  and  it  is  among  the  things 
whereof  it  is  declared :  This  generation  shall  not  pass 
till  all  these  thinojs  be  fulfilled.^ 

Such  seems  to  be  the  plain  meaning  of  Matthew's 
report  of  the  apocalyptic  discourse.  Yet  there  are 
certain  things  which  suggest  the  thought  that,  after  his 
usual  manner,  he  has  gathered  together  in  one  place 
words  spoken  on  different  occasions,  and  connected 
future  events  more  closely  in  time  than  the  actual 
utterances  of  Jesus  justified.  In  the  first  place,  the 
main  subject  of  the  discourse  was  undoubtedly  the 
judgment  of  Israel.  This  is  manifest  even  from 
Matthew's  record,  and  on  turnimr  to  Mark  and  Luke 
we  find  that  the  one  subject  of  inquiry  on  the  part 
of  the  disciples  was  wdien  the  predicted  destruction  of 
the  temple  should  take  place.^  Then  the  €vd6co<;,  "  forth- 
with," connecting  that  event  with  the  coming  of  the 
Son  of  Man,  strictly  interpreted,  does  not  seem  com- 
patible with  a  remarkable  saying  embedded  in  the 
discourse,  to  which  I  have  not  yet  alluded,  that,  viz., 
in  which  Jesus  declares  that  "  of  that  day  and  hour 
knoweth  no  one,  not  even  the  angels  of  heaven,  neither 
the   Son,   but    the    Father    only,"  ^      Such   a   declaration 

1  Matt.  xxiv.  29-31.  2  j^f^rk  xiii.  4  ;  Luke  xxi.  7. 

^  Matt.  xxiv.  36.  The  clause  ovli  6  v!6g  is  not  in  the  T.  K. ;  but 
the  best  ancient  authorities  liave  it,  and  it  is  restored  in  critical 
editions. 

T 


290  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

could  not  be  made,  either  with  regard  to  an  event  con- 
cerning which  it  was  known  that  it  would  happen  within 
the  living  generation,  or  with  reference  to  another  event 
concerning  which  it  was  known  that  it  would  happen 
immediately  after  the  other.  The  two  declarations  : 
"  All  will  happen  in  this  generation/'  "  No  one  knows 
the  time,"  are  irreconcilable,  taken  as  referring  to  the 
same  event.  It  may,  indeed,  be  attempted  to  harmonize 
them  by  taking  the  one  as  referring  to  the  general  epoch, 
and  the  other  to  the  precise  time,  say  the  particular  year. 
But  this  interpretation  is  hardly  compatible  with  the 
peculiar  solemnity  with  which  the  Speaker  proclaims 
His  ignorance.  The  declaration  evidently  refers  to 
something  concerning  which  He  knows  less  than  He 
knows  about  Israel's  impending  calamities.  Some,  in- 
deed, take  it  as  referring  to  those  calamities,  and  regard 
it  as  the  direct  reply  of  Jesus  to  the  question  of  the 
disciples,  viewing  all  that  lies  between  as  an  apocalyptic 
writing  of  Judeo-Christian  authorship  interpolated  into 
the  narrative,  the  incompatibility  between  the  two  texts 
being  cited  in  proof  of  the  hypothesis.^  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  reason  to  doubt  that  Jesus  did  on  several 
occasions  speak  of  Israel's  judgment-day  as  very  near. 
The  prophetic  insight  of  the  Son  of  Man  enabled  Him 
to  read  the  signs  of  the  times,  and  to  predict  that  the 
fateful  day  would  fall  within  the  existing  generation. 
The  xjrofessicn  of  ignorance,  therefore,  must  be  taken  to 
refer  to  another  day,  separated  from  the  former  by  an 
unknown,  indefinite  interval. 

^  So'  Colani,  Jesus    Christ   et   les    Croyances  Mcsslaniques   de   son 
Temps,  p.  209. 


THE  PAROUSIA  AND  THE  CHRISTIAN  ERA.  291 

The  narratives  of  Mark  and  Luke  present  variations 
which  are  very  significant  in  view  of  the  declaration  of 
nescience.  Mark  connects  the  coming  of  the  Son  of 
Man  with  the  affliction  of  Israel  more  loosely  than 
Matthew.  His  phrase  is :  "  In  those  days,  after  that 
tribulation ; "  ^  which  leaves  room  for  the  lapse  of  time, 
and  makes  it  conceivable  how  Jesus  might  declare  Him- 
self ignorant  of  the  day  and  hour^  (of  His  final  coming), 
while  so  positively  affirming  that  Israel's  judgment-day 
would  fall  within  the  existing  generation.  Luke,  on  the 
other  hand,  altogether  avoids  using  words  expressive  of 
sequence,  introducing  the  paragraph  concerning  the 
coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  with  the  words :  "  And 
there  shall  be  signs  in  the  sun,"  etc.^  He  does  not  mean 
to  represent  what  follows  in  his  narrative  as  taking  place 
after  the  times  of  the  Gentiles  mentioned  in  the  verse 
immediately  preceding.  He  rather  thinks  of  the  coming 
of  the  Son  of  Man  as  contemporaneous  with  the  destruc- 
tion of  Jerusalem.  That  is  to  say,  it  is  no  longer  the 
final,  apocalyptic  coming  that  is  spoken  of,  but  the 
historical  coming  at  the  Jewish  crisis ;  a  coming  not 
following,  but  going  before  the  times  of  the  Gentiles,  in 
the  description  of  which  some  apocalyptic  features  are 
still  retained,  but  very  much  toned  down  as  compared 
with  Matthew's  version.  And  what  of  the  declaration 
of  ignorance  ?  It  is  omitted  altogether.  In  explanation 
of  this  it  has  been  suggested  that,  when  Luke's  Gospel 
was  written,  the  feeling  of  the  Church  could  no  longer 
bear  to  have  such  ignorance  ascribed  to  Jesus.  A  more 
likely  explanation  is  that  the  evangelist,  having  made  his 
^  Mark  xiii.  24.  2  yej..  25.  ^  L^ke  xxi.  25. 


292  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

version  of  the  discourse  have  reference  solely  to  things 
connected  with  the  judgment  of  Israel,  felt  that  the 
profession  of  nescience  could  not  suitably  be  introduced 
into  it  alongside  of  the  announcement  that  all  should 
happen  within  "  this  generation."  The  omission  confirms 
the  view  that  the  two  declarations  could  not  be  made 
with  reference  to  the  same  events. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE. 

Jesus  knew  and  taught  not  only  that  the  kmgdom  of 
God  should  have  a  history  on  the  earth,  but  what  the 
general  course  and  character  of  that  history  should  be. 
The  synoptical  records  supply  us  with  materials  for 
sketching  in  outline  the  fortunes  of  the  kingdom  from 
its  cradle  to  its  consummation,  presenting  a  picture  full 
of  moral  if  not  of  political  interest.  In  reference  to  the 
initial  stage,  the  relative  utterances  are  in  one  view 
simple  statements  of  facts  based  on  personal  observation 
of  what  was  actually  taking  place  ;  only  such  as  refer  to 
the  more  advanced  stages  can  be  considered  prophetical. 
Yet  even  in  the  statements  of  fact  there  is,  as  we  shall 
see,  a  prophetic  element,  in  virtue  of  which,  while  telling 
what  now  is,  they  at  the  same  time  foreshadow  what 
shall  be. 

The  general  impression  made  by  these  sayings  of 
Jesus  concerning  the  future  is,  that  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  is  to  be  of  a  chequered  character.  They  teach 
that  there  will  be  much  in  its  course  throughout  tending 
to  disappoint  and  disenchant,  and  that  the  ideal  will  be 
far  enough  from  being  satisfactorily  realized.  A  few 
utterances,  taken  by  themselves,  might  lead  us  to  form 


294  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

an  opposite  expectation.  The  most  outstanding  of  these 
are  the  two  parables  of  The  Mustard  Seed  and  The  Leaven,^ 
which  seem  to  predict  for  the  kingdom  a  career  of  un- 
impeded progress,  through  which  it  will  spread  itself  on 
all  sides  till  it  cover  the  earth,  and  work  with  an  all- 
pervading  intensive  force  till  it  has  made  its  influence 
felt  in  every  department  of  human  life.  Had  these 
parables  stood  alone,  we  should  have  formed  from  them 
the  most  sanguine  and  optimistic  idea  of  the  prospects 
of  Christianity,  which  would  have  stood  in  strange 
saddening  contrast  with  the  facts  as  they  lie  before  us 
in  the  pages  of  church  history.  But  they  do  not  stand 
alone ;  for,  though  full  of  the  spirit  of  hope,  Jesus  was 
no  shallow  optimist  or  unthinking  enthusiast.  He  took 
a  very  sober  and  even  sombre  view  of  the  course  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  was  to  run  on  earth,  as  will  be 
apparent  from  the  texts  about  to  come  under  review. 
The  drift  of  these  texts  is  this :  the  kingdom  will  not  be 
as  universal  in  fact  as  it  is  in  design,  or  as  pure  in 
reality  as  it  is  in  its  own  nature.  Its  development  will 
be  hindered  in  various  ways.  By  some  it  will  be  rejected 
altogether;  by  others  it  will  be  received  only  in  an 
abortive  manner  or  in  corrupt  form. 

This  part  of  our  Lord's  teaching  to  a  large  extent 
assumed  the  parabolic  form ;  very  naturally,  as  the 
parable  suits  the  mood  of  despondency  and  the  mystic 
style  of  prophecy.  Among  the  most  important  parabolic 
contributions  to  the  doctrine  of  the  future  is  the  familiar 
parable  of   The  Soiocr^  which  appears  to  have  been  the 

1  Matt.  xiii.  31-33  ;  Luke  xiii.  18-21. 

2  Matt.  xiii.  3-9,  et  jxiralL 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE.  295 

first  formal  instance  of  the  use  by  Jesus  of  that  method 
of  setting  forth  thought.  It  teaches  that  among  those 
wlio  are  invited  to  receive  the  truths  of  the  kingdom 
will  ever  be  found  many  in  whose  case  the  good  seed 
will  come  to  nothing,  and  whose  spiritual  experiences 
will  turn  out  abortive.  The  parable  is,  in  the  first 
place,  a  record  of  observation.  The  Speaker  has  found 
among  His  own  hearers  the  classes  of  men  typified  by 
the  beaten  path,  the  rocky  soil,  the  soil  foul  luith  thorn 
roots  or  seeds,  and  the  good  soil,  soft,  deep,  and  clean: 
some  curious  about  Himself,  His  doctrine,  and  His 
kingdom,  yet  with  minds  so  hard  -  trodden  by  the 
current  thoughts  of  the  world  that  no  distinct  ideas 
could  be  communicated  to  them — all  they  heard  being 
forthwith  forgotten ;  others,  lively  and  impressionable, 
easily  touched  on  the  emotional,  imaginative  side  of 
their  nature,  catching  up  with  enthusiasm  the  new 
doctrine  of  the  kingdom,  but  only  to  be  forthwith  dis- 
enchanted and  scared  by  the  sober  realities  of  disciple- 
ship  ;  a  third  class,  more  deliberate  and  thoughtful,  and 
likely  to  persevere  with  anything  they  take  in  hand, 
but  men  of  divided  heart,  interested  in  the  kingdom 
sufficiently  to  persevere  in  discipleship  beyond  the  blade 
into  the  green  ear,  but  still  more  interested  in  them- 
selves, and  therefore  unable  to  bring  forth  fruit  unto 
perfection ;  a  few  choice  rare  ones,  such  as  Peter  and 
John,  of  noble  generous  spirit,  receiving  the  doctrine 
into  mind,  heart,  and  conscience,  and  giving  the  kingdom 
the  first  place  in  their  regards,  and  therefore  destined  to 
bring  forth  in  due  season  an  abundant  harvest  of 
spiritual   character.     The    parable,    while   a    history,   is 


296  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

at  the  same  time  a  prophecy.  Jesus  offers  His  experi- 
ence as  a  sample  of  what  the  preachers  of  the  kinf,^dom 
may  expect,  proceeding  on  the  assumption  that  human 
nature  will  remain  constant,  and  that  the  types  of 
character  depicted  will  reproduce  themselves  in  every 
generation.  The  assumption,  which  made  prediction 
possible,  has  been  amply  justified  by  the  event.  There 
have  always  been  examples  of  the  diverse  classes  of 
hearers.  Of  the  best  class,  the  men  of  noble  and 
generous  heart,  there  have  sometimes  been  too  few — 
heroic  virtue  is,  indeed,  always  rare ;  but  of  the  baser 
sorts  there  is  always  an  abundant  supply.  The  dispro- 
portion between  the  noble  and  the  ignoble  is  one  of  the 
things  which  make  the  earthly  realization  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  so  disappointing  to  all  the  Christ-like. 

But  another  feature  still  more  disappointing  is  brought 
l)efore  us  in  two  other  parables.  The  diverse  types  of 
imsatisfactory  hearers  in  the  parable  of  The  Sower  may 
be  regarded  merely  as  varieties  of  human  infirmity  mani- 
festing itself  in  well-meaning  men.  In  the  parables  of 
The  Tares  and  The  Drag  Net^  especially  in  the  former,  we 
are  warned  that  in  the  future  history  of  the  kingdom 
there  will  appear  a  revolting  and  unnatural  mixture  of 
good  and  bad  men,  Christians  and  anti  -  Christians, 
children  of  the  heavenly  Father  and  children  of  Satan. 
The  evil  are  to  resemble  the  good  as  "  tares "  {^i^dvia, 
bearded  darnel)  resemble  wheat,  the  resemblance  being  so 
close  that  till  the  plants  reach  the  ear  they  cannot  easily 
be  distinguished.  They  are  in  the  kingdom  and  bear 
the  Christian  name.  But  they  are  not  the  better  on 
1  Matt.  xiii.  24-29,  47-50. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE,  297 

account  of  this  external  similitude,  but  rather  the  worse; 
counterfeit  citizens  of  the  kingdom,  children  of  darkness 
wearing  the  guise  of  children  of  the  light,  wolves  in 
sheep's  clothing,  Christians  in  name,  only  to  be  all  the 
more  thoroughly  anti-Christian  in  spirit.  The  feelings 
likely  to  be  awakened  by  the  appearance  of  these 
ungenial  and  unwelcome  characters  in  the  Church  were 
just  such  as  are  described  in  the  parable — surprise  and 
impatience.  "Sir,  didst  not  thou  sow  good  seed  in  thy  field, 
from  whence  then  hath  it  tares  ?  "  It  is  the  question  of 
honest  men  to  whom  the  strange  mixture  is  at  once  an 
astonishment  and  a  vexation.  Of  course  the  impulse  of 
faithful  servants  is  at  once  to  get  rid  of  the  intruders. 
"  Wilt  thou  then  that  we  go  and  gather  them  up  ?  '* 
Fully  appreciating  the  naturalness  of  the  proposal,  and 
the  praiseworthiness  of  the  zeal  out  of  which  it  springs, 
Jesus  nevertheless  negatives  it,  making  the  master  say  in 
reply  to  his  servants :  "  No,  lest  while  ye  gather  up  the 
tares,  ye  root  up  also  the  wheat  with  them.  Let  them 
both  grow  together  until  the  harvest."  That  the  Founder 
of  the  kingdom  should  recommend  this  policy  of  patience 
has  probably  been  little  less  of  a  surprise  to  His 
followers  than  the  appearance  of  the  evils  to  be  tolerated. 
It  seems  so  right  and  reasonable  that  plants  known  to  be 
noxious  weeds,  which  is  the  case  supposed,  should  at  once 
be  removed.  Yet  Christ  deliberately  recommends  patience 
as  the  least  of  two  evils,  the  other  being  the  uprooting 
of  wheat  along  with  tares  in  headlong  zeal  to  get  rid  of 
the  noxious  crop ;  which  implies  a  close  interrelationship 
between  the  two  kinds  of  growths  that  may  well  seem  an 
additional  calamity.       Practically,  the   Church   has    not 


298  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

been  able  to  work  out  this  policy  of  patience.  To  wait 
calmly  for  the  final  separation,  when  the  scandals  and 
the  workers  of  iniquity  shall  be  gathered  together  and 
thrown  into  the  fire,  and  the  righteous  shall  at  length 
shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their  Father, 
seems  a  task  too  severe  for  frail  human  tempers.  God 
alone  can  so  wait.  All  through  the  history  of  the  Church 
the  servants  of  truth  and  righteousness  have  been  busily 
occupied  in  getting  rid  of  the  scandalous,  especially  in 
connection  with  matters  of  faith.  "  Out  with  the  heretics  " 
has  been  the  watchword  of  nearly  all  faithful  men ;  and 
the  result  is  that  instead  of  one  Church  in  the  world  an 
approximate  realization  of  the  divine  kingdom,  there  are 
hundreds  of  Churches,  each,  in  theory  at  least,  justifying 
its  own  separate  existence  by  accusing  all  the  rest  of 
being  tares.  A  futile  quest  after  purity,  which  has  too 
often  ended  by  propagating  within  the  most  exclusive 
societies  tares  of  the  worst  description,  viz.  spiritual 
pride  and  self-righteousness,  and  all  the  vices  of  a  self- 
satisfied  Pharisaism.  Yet  we  cannot  greatly  wonder  that 
men  have  not  been  able  to  wait  for  the  last  judgment. 
The  moral  order  of  the  world  itself  does  not  wait,  but  is 
incessantly  judging  and  sifting,  and  at  critical  times  in 
Iniman  history  makes  great  collections  of  scandals  and 
kindles  judicial  bonfires. 

It  was  an  act  of  mercy  in  Jesus  to  utter  that  parable 
of  The  Tares.  He  spoke  it  not  merely  to  teach  His 
followers  patience,  but  to  keep  them  from  despair.  For 
nothing  can  tempt  more  fiercely  to  despair  concerning  the 
realization  of  all  ideals,  and  to  treat  them  as  idle  dreams, 
than  to  see  that  pure  heavenly  thing  which  Jesus  con- 


THE  HISTOEY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  m  OUTLINE.  299 

ceived,  the  kingdom  of  God,  defiled  and  bemired  by  the 
presence  of  evil  unworthy  elements :  the  divine  amalga- 
mated with  the  Satanic,  heaven  with  hell,  the  best  with 
the  worst.  We  are  prone  to  ask  in  bitterness  what 
mischiefs  hath  not  religion  wrought,  had  w^e  not  better 
do  without  it  ?  If  only  we  could !  But  the  Christian 
religion  is  the  best,  as  its  counterfeit  may  be  the  worst  of 
all  things.  We  cannot  do  without  our  religious  ideals, 
and  if  along  with  these  come  hideous  caricatures,  our 
Master  has  taught  us  to  find  in  the  one  a  sedative  and 
place  of  refuge  from  the  other. 

Jesus  taught  that  the  kingdom  would  meet  with  a 
variable  reception  depending  not  merely  on  psychological 
differences  between  individuals  (as  in  the  parable  of  the 
Sower),  but  on  social  distinctions.  This  truth  He  hinted 
at  when  He  spoke  of  the  things  of  the  kingdom  as  being- 
hid  from  the  wise  and  understanding,  and  revealed  to 
babes.  The  w^ord  was  in  the  first  place  a  statement  of 
fact  and  personal  experience,  but  it  was,  moreover,  the 
suggestion  of  a  principle,  and  the  prediction  of  a  recurrent 
experience.  He  meant  to  say  that  men  of  the  type 
represented  by  the  scribes,  learned  in  the  law,  were  not 
likely  to  receive  the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom,  and  that 
disciples  were  more  likely  to  be  found  among  illiterate 
laics.  The  unreceptivity  of  the  former  class  He  partly 
explained  in  the  parable  of  The  Children  in  the  Market- 
jplace^  in  which  He  virtually  represented  the  generation  of 
the  scribes  and  their  disciples  as  whimsical,  unreasonable 
triflers,  who  could  not  be  pleased  with  any  form  of  true 
moral  earnestness  simply  because  they  themselves,  with 
^  Matt.  xi.  16-19. 


300  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

all  their  zeal  for  the  law,  were  not  in  earnest,  but  were 
only  playing  at  being  religious  and  righteous.  But  the 
parable  should  not  be  taken  as  a  complete  description  of 
the  class,  or  as  intended  to  negative  their  claim  to  some 
estimable  qualities  ;  all  the  more  that  the  very  qualities 
denoted  by  the  attributes  "  wise  and  understanding " 
ascribed  to  them  by  Jesus  acted  as  hindrances  to  faith. 
Pride  and  self  -  righteousness  apart,  the  scribes,  just 
because  they  were  in  a  way  wise,  were  all  but  doomed  to 
an  attitude  of  unbelief.  Their  snare  was  mental  pre- 
occupation, the  power  of  which  in  producing  indifference 
or  aversion  to  the  doctrine  of  the  kingdom  Jesus  illus- 
trated in  a  popular  manner  in  the  parable  of  The  Great 
Sapper}  The  forms  of  preoccupation  therein  mentioned 
are  such  as  are  most  suited  to  parabolic  narration,  such, 
namely,  as  arise  from  the  business  and  pleasures  of  ordi- 
nary life.  They  are  not  the  only  forms,  or  even  the  most 
important,  or  such  as  chiefly  beset  the  class  of  men 
represented  at  the  dinner-table  when  the  parable  was 
spoken.  The  preoccupations  of  the  wise  and  learned  were 
of  a  more  dignified  and  respectable  character,  and  just  on 
that  account  the  source  of  a  subtler  temptation.  They 
consisted  in  a  system  of  fixed  opinions  on  all  the  matters 
on  which  Christ  in  His  teaching  touched  :  on  God,  man, 
the  kingdom,  the  Messiah.  There  was  nothing  on  which 
it  was  possible  for  a  religious  and  ethical  teacher  to  speak 
on  which  they  had  not  already  formed  their  theories  and 
drawn  their  sapient  conclusions.  Their  minds  were  full 
and  satisfied,  and  there  was  no  room  or  taste  for  new 
ideas.  Therefore  Christ's  chief  chance  of  a  hearing  was 
1  Luke  xiv.  16-24. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE.         301 

among  the  aypdfifiarot,  koI  Ihiwrai}  the  unlearned  laity, 
who  were  comparatively  empty,  unbiassed,  open-minded. 
He  offered  to  teach  them,  and  they  received  Him  gladly, 
and  eagerly  drank  in  the  good  tidings.  So  it  came  to  pass 
that  the  empty  and  the  hungry  were  filled  with  the  good 
things  of  the  kingdom,  while  the  rich  in  reputation  for 
wisdom  went  away  empty.  And  the  experience  of  that 
age  was  prophetic  :  the  same  phenomenon  recurs  from 
age  to  age,  at  every  new  era  when  the  kingdom  comes  in 
fresh  power,  under  new  aspects.  The  "  wise  "  espouse  no  I 
cause  when  it  is  new.  When  the  new  thing  has  become 
an  established  institution,  they  will  patronize  it.  Theii 
interest  then  is  not  in  the  thing  itself,  but  in  its  secular 
adjuncts.  They  love  the  kingdom,  not  as  a  kingdom  of 
heaven,  but  only  in  so  far  as  it  is  become  a  kingdom 
of  this  world. 

The  experience  of  Jesus  repeated  itself  in  the  apostolic 
Church.  Paul  alludes  to  and  describes  the  fact  in  these 
terms :  "  Ye  see  your  calling,  brethren,  how  that  there 
are  not  many  wise  men  after  the  flesh,  not  many  mighty, 
not  many  noble ;  but  the  foolish  things  of  the  world  hath 
God  chosen,  that  He  might  confound  the  wise,"  etc.^  He 
makes  it  a  matter  of  sovereign  divine  election.  So 
also  did  Christ  when  He  said :  "  Thou  hast  hid  these 
things  from  the  wise,  and  revealed  them  unto  babes." 
This  is  the  rehgious  view  of  the  phenomenon,  most 
important  in  its  own  place ;  but  it  does  not  exclude 
natural  causes  or  interdict  inquiry  into  these.  The 
diversities  in  question  are  not  confined  to  the  rehgious 
sphere.  They  repeat  themselves  in  connection  with 
1  Acts  iv.  13.  2  1  Cor.  i.  26,  27. 


302  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

every  new  movement  of  thought,  and  they  are  perfectly 
intelligible.  Possession,  wealth  in  every  form,  is  conser- 
vative, cautious,  slow  in  sympathy,  and  languid  in  sup- 
port ;  whether  it  be  the  intellectual  wealth  of  knowledge, 
or  the  moral  wealth  of  character,  or  the  material  wealth 
of  outward  property.  The  role  of  the  rich  in  wisdom, 
worth,  or  gold  is  not  that  of  the  ardent  pioneer,  but  of 
the  tardy  patron ;  so  they  miss  the  glory  of  martyrdom 
and  also  its  pains.  Their  place  in  the  history  of  the 
kingdom  is  a  very  mean  one — in  the  more  heroic  phases 
of  that  history  they  are  mainly  conspicuous  by  their 
absence. 

Jesus  proclaimed  another  most  important  truth  con- 
cerning the  future  history  of  the  kingdom  when  He  taught 
that  it  was  destined  to  find  a  welcome,  not  among  the 
people  who  might  be  regarded  as  its  natural  heirs,  the 
Jews,  but  rather  among  the  pagan  nations  that  had 
hitherto  been  aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel, 
and  strangers  to  the  covenants  of  promise.  This  is  the 
burden  of  a  whole  series  of  parables,  such  as  The  Barren 
Fig-Tree^  The  Great  SnpiKr,  The  Royal  Wedding^  The  Two 
Sons,^  The  Wicked  Vine-Dressers^  every  one  of  which 
points  more  or  less  clearly  to  the  rejection  of  the  Jews 
and  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles.  The  fig-tree  is  threatened 
with  ejection  because  it  cumbers  the  ground,  that  is, 
occupies  a  space  that  might  be  more  profitably  filled  with 
another  tree.  The  very  selection  of  a  fig  tree  instead  of 
a  vine  to  represent  Israel  is  significant,  as  a  virtual 
denial  of  her  supposed  prescriptive  rights  as  the  chosen 

1  Luke  xiii.  6-12.  2  Matt  xxii.  1-13. 

3  Matt.  xxi.  28-32.  "*  Matt.  xxi.  33-40. 


THE  HISTOPcY  OF  THE  KIN'GDOM  IN  OUTLINE.  303 

people.  In  the  parables  of  The  Great  Supper  and  The 
Royal  Wedding,  the  guests,  brought  in  from  the  highways 
and  hedges  and  lanes,  may  in  the  first  intention  represent 
the  spiritually-neglected  Jewish  populace  as  opposed  to 
the  self-satisfied  scribes  and  Pharisees ;  but  the  principle 
involved  is :  the  kingdom  and  its  blessings  for  the 
hungry  anywhere  and  everywhere,  there  is  plenty  of 
room,  and  I  will  have  my  house  full ;  and  the  probable 
application  is :  privileged  Israel,  self  -  excluded  by  her 
indifference,  unprivileged  heathendom  rendered  eligible  by 
destitution.  In  the  last  parable  of  the  group  the  moral 
is  more  plainly  pointed.  The  wicked  husbandmen, — the 
leaders  of  Israel, — representative  of  the  nation  in  its  cor- 
porative capacity,  are  to  be  destroyed,  and  the  vineyard 
given  to  others  who  will  render  its  fruits.  The  whole 
drift  of  Christ's  teaching  is  in  harmony  with  this  view. 
While  faithfully  labouring  for  her  salvation  He  never 
seems  to  have  had  any  hope  of  Israel  escaping  the  doom 
of  unbelief  and  impenitence.  To  His  prophetic  eye  that 
people  seemed  abandoned  to  ruin,  and  the  kingdom  He 
preached  appeared  in  the  panorama  of  the  future  shaking 
the  dust  off  its  feet  as  it  forsook  the  Holy  Land  and 
marched  forth  full  of  faith  and  hope  into  the  Gentile 
world.  His  clear  vision  of  the  future  migration  was  the 
result  of  perfect  insight  into  the  moral  conditions  of  faith 
and  unbelief.  The  unbelief  of  the  Jews  and  the  faith  of 
the  Gentiles  were  but  illustrations  of  the  great  ethical 
principles  enunciated  in  His  teaching :  the  things  of  the 
kingdom  hid  from  the  wise,  revealed  unto  babes ;  the 
hungry  filled,  the  rich  sent  empty  away ;  grace  given  to 
the  lowly,  the  proud  regarded  afar  off;  the  first  in  their 


304  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

own  esteem  last  in  the  esteem  of  God,  the  last  in  their 
own  esteem  first  in  the  esteem  of  God.  These  principles 
received  illustration  on  a  small  scale  and  within  the 
boundaries  of  Israel  in  Christ's  own  lifetime.  The  sub- 
sequent transition  of  Christianity  from  the  soil  of  Jud?ea 
to  the  wide  world  of  the  Gentiles  was  but  an  illustration 
of  the  same  principles  on  a  wider  scale.  And  as  these 
principles  are  of  perpetual  validity,  new  exemplifications 
of  them  may  be  expected  while  the  Christian  era  lasts. 

Among  the  words  of  Jesus  which  show  the  bright  side 
of  the  prophetic  picture,  must  be  reckoned  those  in  which 
He  declared  that  His  death  would  be  followed  by  resur- 
rection. To  each  one  of  the  three  preannouncements  of 
His  passion  such  a  declaration  is  appended.^  The  doleful 
tidings  of  coming  suffering  ever  wind  up  with  the  cheer- 
ful words,  "  And  be  raised  again."  It  is  easy  to  under- 
stand the  motive  for  this  constant  transition  from  the 
minor  to  the  major  key.  The  reference  to  the  resur- 
rection was  meant  to  make  the  announcement  of  the 
passion  bearable.  "  I  am  about  to  die,"  Jesus  would  say, 
"  but  grieve  not,  I  shall  return  to  you  very  soon."  All 
the  evangelists  agree  in  ascribing  to  Jesus  such  explicit 
predictions  of  His  rising  again,  and  they  must  be  regarded 
as  an  authentic  part  of  the  evangelic  tradition.  The 
only  question  that  can  legitimately  be  raised  is,  what  do 
these  announcements  mean  ?  Do  they  point  to  a  literal 
rising  from  the  grave  of  the  crucified  One,  or  are  they  to 
be  taken  in  a  pregnant  sense  as  intimating  that  the  cause 
of  Jesus  would  not  perish  with  His  life ;  that,  on  the 
contrary,  it  would  live  on  in  spite  of  that  apparently 
^  Matt.  xvi.  21,  xvii.  23,  xx.  19. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE.         305 

crushing  blow,  and  even  thrive  by  means  of  it  ?  There 
is  no  reason  to  oppose  these  two  interpretations  ;  they 
are  probably  both  covered  by  the  words.  Jesus,  I  appre- 
hend, meant  to  say  at  once :  I,  the  crucified,  will  rise 
again,  and  the  cause  I  have  at  heart  will  rise  again :  the 
kingdom  will  come,  and  will  receive  a  mighty  forward 
impulse  through  my  death.  Viewed  in  the  latter  sense, 
the  prophecy  of  resurrection  was  but  a  special  application 
and  instance  of  the  general  law  of  progress  through 
antagonism,  life  saved  by  losing  it,  peace  the  conquest  of 
the  sword,^  Faith  in  that  law  enabled  Jesus  to  predict 
with  unwavering  confidence  the  survival  and  rapid  spread 
of  His  religion  after  His  death,  and  to  go  forward,  in 
consequence,  with  firm  step  to  meet  His  own  fate.  In 
that  sense  He  might  have  said,  •'  I  will  rise  again,"  though 
He  had  meant  nothing  more.  But  that  He  did  mean 
something  more,  even  His  own  personal  resurrection,  we 
can  have  no  doubt,  when  we  remember  how  much  the 
future  of  the  kingdom  depended  on  the  apostles.  The 
cause  of  Jesus  could  only  revive  and  thrive  through  them. 
If  they  lost  heart,  then,  humanly  speaking,  it  was  all 
over  with  the  Christian  faith  ;  the  kingdom  was  dead 
irretrievably,  henceforth  to  remain  in  men's  memories  a 
generous  but  fond  dream.  But  how  were  the  apostles  to 
be  inspired  with  heart  and  hope  ?  By  faith  in  the  resur- 
rection of  their  Master.  That  this  faith  was  indispensable 
is  universally  acknowdedged.  Naturalism  admits  the  need 
of  the  apostolic  faith  in  the  resurrectit>n  of  the  Lord ;  it 
only  denies  that  the  fact  of  the  resurrection  was  the 
cause  of  the  faith.     For  those  to  whom  the  miraculous  is 

1  Matt.  X.  34. 
U 


306  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

impossible  such  denial  is  inevitable ;  the  only  course  left 
for  them  is  to  invent  theories  to  account  for  the  faith 
while  denying  the  fact.  But  from  the  point  of  view  of 
Jesus  the  faith  and  the  fact  went  together.  If  He 
regarded  it  as  necessary  for  the  future  success  of  His 
cause  that  His  disciples  should  believe  in  His  resurrection, 
He  must  also  have  regarded  it  as  necessary  that  He  should 
actually  rise  from  the  dead.  Therefore,  to  His  mind,  the 
thought,  "  My  cause  shall  rise  again,"  involved  the  other, 
"  I  shall  rise  again,"  and  in  predicting  the  one  event  He 
also  predicted  the  other. 

The  resurrection  of  Jesus  being  in  itself  a  welcome 
event,  there  was  not  the  same  urgent  necessity  as  in  the 
case  of  His  death  for  bringing  into  play  the  religious 
imagination  to  invest  it  with  mystic  meanings.  The 
doctrine  of  a  crucified  Christ  could  become  tolerable 
only  in  the  light  of  its  rationale.  Jesus  risen  would  be 
hailed  by  His  mourning  disciples  whatever  the  theological 
import  of  His  rising  again  might  be,  or  even  though  it 
had  none.  We  are  not  surprised  therefore  to  miss  in 
the  synoptic  records  sayings  concerning  the  resurrection 
analogous  to  those  in  which  the  vSpiritual  significance 
of  the  passion  is  unfolded.  The  solitary  exception,  if  it 
be  one,  is  that  which  refers  to  destroying  the  temple  and 
raising  it  again  in  three  days.  Of  the  authenticity  of  this 
remarkable  saying  there  can  be  no  doubt,  seeing  it  is  pre- 
served, not  only  in  the  fourth  Gospel,^  but  also,  in  a  slightly 
altered  form,  by  two  of  the  Synoptics,  Matthew  and  Mark.^ 
There  is  less  certainty  as  to  when  and  in  what  precise 
terms  it  was  uttered,  and  there  is  also  much  difference 
1  John  ii.  19.  ^  Matt.  xxvi.  61  ;  Mark  xiv.  58. 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KIXGDOM  IX  OUTLINE.         307 

of  opinion  among  interpreters  as  to  its  meaning.  The 
author  of  the  fourth  Gospel  places  it  at  the  beginning  of 
the  history,  and  in  connection  with  the  cleansing  of  the 
temple,  which  in  his  narrative  appears  as  an  initial  act  of 
zeal  on  the  part  of  Jesus  protesting  against  the  profanation 
of  the  sanctuary.  Asked  by  what  authority  He  acted.  He 
replied :  Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will 
raise  it  up.  The  evangelist  adds  the  explanatory  comment : 
"  He  spake  of  the  temple  of  His  body,"  so  making  the 
words  bear  a  hidden  allusion  to  the  resurrection.  The 
synoptical  evangelists  introduce  the  saying  into  their 
account  of  Christ's  trial,  putting  it  into  the  mouth  of  cer- 
tain witnesses  as  a  word  they  professed  to  have  heard  Him 
utter.  They  give  no  indication  of  the  occasion  on  which 
it  was  originally  spoken  ;  they  do  not  even  so  much  as 
state  distinctly  whether  Jesus  ever  spoke  it  at  all.  From 
the  fact  that  they  characterize  the  witnesses  as  false,  one 
might  infer  that  they  meant  to  hint  that  the  story  was 
a  pure  fabrication.  The  probability,  however,  is  that  the 
falsehood  consisted  in  reporting  Christ's  words  in  a  per- 
verted form,  fitted  to  create  a  prejudice  against  Him,  the 
witnesses  making  Him  say,  "  I  will  destroy  this  temple," 
instead  of  "  destroy  this  temple,"  as  reported  in  the 
fourth  Gospel.  The  historical  connection  assigned  to  the 
saying  in  the  same  Gospel  seems  very  suitable.  Xo  more 
appropriate  occasion  for  such  an  utterance  can  be  thought 
of  than  the  solemn  moment  when,  overtaken  by  an  irre- 
sistible impulse  of  zeal,  Jesus  drove  the  crowd  of  profane 
traffickers  out  of  the  sacred  precincts.  At  such  an  hour 
He  might  very  seasonably  speak  of  the  destruction  of  the 
temple  as  the  sure  ultimate  result  of  the  encouragement 


308  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

or  tolerance  of  such  unholy  traffic  on  the  part  of  irreverent 
officials.  Asked  for  a  sign  of  His  right  to  act  as  He  did, 
He  might  very  well  reply,  Destroy  ye  this  temple,  for 
that  is  the  work  ye  are  busily  engaged  in ;  my  part  will 
be  to  build  it  again.  Truly  interpreted  such  words 
would  not  necessarily  mean  more  than  that  in  the  view 
of  Jesus  what  was  going  on  in  the  religious  world  of 
Judsea  tended  surely  to  the  ruin  of  existing  religious 
institutions,  and  that  it  was  His  hope  to  replace  these 
Ijy  a  new  and  purer  worship,  even  by  the  setting  up  of 
the  kingdom  of  God.  It  would  not  occur  to  us,  apart 
from  the  hint  of  the  evangelist,  to  find  in  the  saying  any 
reference  to  the  resurrection.  The  specification  of  "  three 
days  "  as  the  time  within  which  the  re-edification  of  the 
ruined  sanctuary  is  to  take  place  does  not  necessarily  in- 
volve any  such  reference,  for  it  may  be  nothing  more  than 
a  proverbial  phrase  for  a  short  time.  If  the  cleansing  of 
the  temple  took  place  at  the  beginning  of  His  public 
ministry,  as  the  fourth  Gospel  represents,  it  is  difficult  to 
Ijelieve  that  at  so  early  a  period  Jesus  had  His  resurrec- 
tion distinctly  in  view.  Accordingly  some  writers,  such 
as  Weiss,  who  accept  John's  narrative  as  otherwise  cor- 
rect, hold  that  he  is  mistaken  in  thinking  that  the  words 
had  a  reference  to  that  event.  I  sympathize  with  this 
view  so  far  as  to  admit  that,  while  the  cleansing  of  the 
temple  seems  most  appropriately  placed  at  the  beginning 
of  the  history,  the  saying  concerning  destroying  the 
temple,  if  it  contained  any  immediate  and  conscious  allu- 
sion to  the  resurrection,  appears  suitable  only  to  a  more 
advanced  period.  But  it  is  not  necessary  to  assume  any 
allusion  of   that   description   in   order   to   vindicate   the 


THE  HISTORY  OF  THE  KINGDOM  IN  OUTLINE.  309 

substantial  accuracy  of  John's  representation.  The  true 
state  of  the  case  I  conceive  to  have  been  somewhat  as 
follows.  The  words  in  question  were  spoken  in  connec- 
tion with  the  cleansing  of  the  temple  at  the  opening  of 
Christ's  public  career,  and  their  meaning  was :  I  will 
show  my  right  to  do  what  I  have  done  by  setting  up  the 
kingdom  of  God  in  place  of  this  sanctuary  which  ye  are 
doing  your  best  to  destroy.  But  as  time  went  on  the 
saying  proved  to  be  one  of  those  mystic  pregnant  words 
which  imply  more  than  they  explicitly  state,  or  than  any 
one  thought  of  when  they  were  first  uttered.  It  became 
apparent  that  the  destroying  of  the  temple  had  a  close 
connection  with  destroying  Jesus,  and  the  raising  of  it 
again  with  His  resurrection.  A  dim  presentiment  of  this 
was  probably  present  to  Christ's  thoughts  from  the  first, 
but  it  grew  clearer  with  the  progress  of  events.  Before 
the  end  came  it  had  grown  evident  to  Him  that  His  own 
death  and  the  ruin  of  the  Jewish  sanctuary  and  state 
were  connected  together  as  inevitable  common  effects  of 
the  same  causes,  and  on  the  other,  bright,  side  of  the 
picture  His  prophetic  eye  saw  His  personal  resurrection 
and  the  resurrection  of  true  religion  in  the  apostolic 
Church  linked  together  as  means  and  end.  When  the 
witnesses  at  the  trial  reminded  Him  of  the  word  He  had 
spoken  three  years  before  He  silently  reaffirmed  it 
charged  with  all  that  new  meaning.  He  said  nothing — 
how  could  He  make  Himself  intelligible  to  such  an  audi- 
ence ? — but  He  thought  much.  A  whole  apocalypse  of 
the  future  flashed  through  His  mind,  in  the  vivid  light 
of  which  He  saw  at  the  same  moment :  Himself  a  victim 
on  the  cross,  Jerusalem  in  ruins,  the  crucified  One  risen, 


310  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

the  new  Christian  world  ushered  into  being,  the  whole 
vision  capable  of  being  summed  up  in  the  pregnant  oracle  : 
Destroy  this  temple,  and  in  three  days  I  will  raise  it 
again. 

Thus  viewed,  the  saying  under  consideration  had  a  real 
connection  in  our  Lord's  mind  both  with  His  resurrection 
as  a  means  and  with  the  inbringing  of  the  true  religion 
as  an  end.  At  first  the  end  was  mainly  thought  of,  but 
gradually  the  means  came  distinctly  into  consciousness. 
The  second  and  fourth  evangelists  by  their  explanatory 
glosses  give,  between  them,  the  full  significance  of  the  say- 
ing, Mark  making  the  last  part  of  it  point  to  the  building 
of  another  temple  made  without  hands  (putting,  doubtless, 
his  own  thought  into  the  mouth  of  the  witnesses),  while 
John  finds  in  it  a  reference  to  the  temple  of  Christ's 
risen  body.  The  two  glosses  represent  different  ways  of 
interpreting  the  oracle  current  in  the  Church,  easily 
reconcilable  with  each  other.  The  gloss  of  the  second 
Gospel  comes  nearest  to  what  may  be  supposed  to  have 
been  in  Christ's  mind  when  He  uttered  the  words ;  that 
of  the  fourth  to  the  reflections  of  Jesus  on  hearing  them 
repeated  three  years  later,  when  He  stood  a  prisoner  at 
the  bar  of  the  Sanhedrim.  From  the  two  combined  we 
learn  to  regard  the  resurrection  of  our  Lord  as  at  once  a 
cause  and  a  symbol  of  the  new  spiritual  life  embodied  in 
Christendom.  As  with  His  death  the  old  world  passed 
away,  so  with  His  resurrection  a  new  world  sprang  into 
being. 


CHAPTEE  XIV. 


THE  END. 


Teom  the  texts  cited  in  the  foregoing  chapter  it  plainly 
appears  that  Jesus  did  not  expect  the  kingdom  of  God 
during  the  period  of  its  earthly  development  to  be  other 
than  an  imperfect  disappointing  thing.  But  He  did  not 
on  that  account  despair  as  to  the  final  fortunes  of  the 
kingdom.  He  believed  that  the  ideal  would  eventually 
be  realized,  that  the  kingdom  would  at  length  come  in  all 
its  perfection  and  purity. 

This  consummation  might  be  reached  in  either  of  two 
ways  :  either  by  all  men  being  transformed  into  genuine 
sons  of  the  kingdom,  or  by  a  judicial  separation  between 
genuine  and  counterfeit,  between  friends  and  foes.  In 
the  recorded  sayings  of  Christ  relative  to  this  subject 
purity  is  represented  as  being  reached  by  separation.  So 
in  the  parable  of  The  Tares :  Let  hoth  grow  together  icntil 
the  harvest :  and  in  the  time  of  harvest  I  vnll  say  to  the 
reapers,  Gather  ye  together  first  the  tares,  and  hind  them  in 
hundles  to  burn  them :  hut  gather  the  wheat  into  my  ham ;  ^ 
and  in  its  interpretation  :  As  therefore  the  tares  are  gathered 
and  burned  in  the  fi,re ;  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  this 
world.      The  Son  of  Man  shall  send  forth  His  angels,  and 


1  Matt.  xiii.  30. 

311 


^J 


olZ  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

thei/  shall  gather  out  of  His  kingdom  all  things  that  offend 
(ra  aKcivSaXa),  and  them  that  do  iniquity,  and  shall  cast 
them  into  a  furnace  of  fire :  there  shall  he  wailing  and 
gnashing  of  teeth.  Then  shall  the  righteous  shine  forth  as 
the  smi  in  the  ki?igdom  of  their  Father} 

These  words  point  to  a  process  of  judgment  within  the 
kingdom.  When  we  collect  together  all  Christ's  sayings 
concerning  the  end,  we  find  that  they  may  be  grouped 
into  what  may  be  called  three  judgment  programmes. 
There  is  the  judgment  of  citizens  or  of  Christendom,  the 
judgment  of  opponents  or  of  antichristendom,  and  the 
judgment  of  those  who  stand  in  no  conscious  relation  to 
the  kingdom,  or  of  heathendom. 

Many  of  Christ's  sternest  sayings  relate  to  the  first  of 
these  judicial  processes,  and  contain  severe  sentences  on 
the  various  sins  of  false  discipleship  and  unfaithful  dis- 
loyal citizenship.  Not  every  one  that  saith  unto  me,  Lord., 
Lordf  pronounces  a  sentence  of  exclusion  on  lip-homage, 
and  zeal  in  technical  service  combined  with  godless 
conduct,  in  which  we  have  to  note  the  keen  insight  and 
moral  discrimination  of  Jesus  shown  in  conceiving  of  such 
a  combination  as  possible.  It  is  a  common  enough  occur- 
rence, yet  how  many  have  ever  refused  to  recognise  the 
fact,  and  have  accepted  religious  talk  and  religious  zeal 
as  conclusive  evidence  of  goodness !  Whosoever  shall 
deny  me  hefore  men,  him  ivill  I  also  deny  before  my  Father 
ivhich  is  in  heaven,^  pronounces  a  doom  of  repudiation  on 
faithless  disciples  who,  through  cowardly,  selfish  fear, 
prove  disloyal  to  the  divine  interest  in  critical,  perilous 

1  Matt.  xiii.  40-43.  '-'  Matt.  vii.  21-23. 

3  Matt.  X.  33  ;  Luke  ix.  26. 


THE  END.  313 

times.  Ambition  and  mercilessness  are  proclaimed  to  be 
ntterly  alien  to  the  kingdom  in  the  sayings :  Except  ye  he 
converted,  and  become  as  little  children,  ye  shall  not  enter 
into  the  kingdoin  of  heaven ;  -^  and,  So  likewise  shall  my 
heavenly  Father  do  also  unto  you,  if  ye  from  your  hearts 
forgive  not  every  one  his  brother  their  trcsimsses?  Tyranny 
gets  its  appropriate  penalty  in  the  word  which  declares 
that  the  lord  of  the  upper  servant  who  maltreats  his 
humbler  fellow-servant  luill  cut  him  in  sunder,  and  loill 
appoint  him  his  p^ortion  ivitli  the  unbelievers?  Mere  negli- 
gence is  relentlessly  judged  :  Cast  ye  the  unprofitable  servant 
into  the  outer  darkness;  there  shall  be  the  weeping  and 
gnashing  of  teetli.^ 

The  materials  relating  to  the  second  judgment  pro- 
gramme are  less  abundant.  In  one  sense,  indeed,  they  are 
exceptionally  copious,  for  the  whole  of  Christ's  criticism 
on  Pharisaism  may  be  said  to  belong  to  this  category. 
His  judgment  on  contemporary  Pharisaism  anticipates 
the  final  judgment  on  that  phase  of  human  character, 
and  reveals  the  principles  on  which  it  will  be  based. 
That  judgment  in  effect  was  this,  that  the  righteousness 
in  vogue  in  Judaea  was  in  spirit,  tendency,  and  result 
wholly  alien  and  hostile  to  the  kingdom  of  God.^  That 
w^as  not  the  judgment  of  those  who  practised  it  on  them- 
selves. They  claimed  to  be  the  rightful  heirs  of  the 
kingdom  and  its  honours.  This  claim  Jesus  recognised 
as  a  fact,  but  refused  to  homologate  when  He  said  :  Many 
shall  come  from  the  east  and  luest,  and  shall  sit  down  loitli 
Abraham  and  Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven. 

1  Matt,  xviii.  3.  -  Matt,  xviii.  35.  ^  Luke  xii.  46. 

4  Matt.  XXV.  30.  ''  Matt.  v.  20. 


314  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

But  the  chilclreii  of  the  kingdom  shall  he  cast  out  into  the 
outer  darhiess}  The  very  essence  of  Pharisaism  was  that 
it  combined  exckisive  pretensions  to  the  rights  of  citizen- 
ship in  the  divine  kingdom  with  bitter  hostility  to  all  its 
true  interests.  The  "  children  of  the  kingdom  "  in  their 
own  esteem,  the  Pharisees  were  the  implacable  enemies 
of  the  kingdom  in  Christ's  esteem.  Their  type  of  cha- 
racter is  not  to  be  confounded  with  that  of  the  men  who 
say,  "  Lord,  Lord,"  and  do  not  the  will  of  the  Father  in 
heaven.  The  vice  of  the  latter  is  inconsistency,  duality 
of  character,  two-souledness,  the  combination  of  religiosity 
with  a  low  moral  tone,  after  the  manner  of  Balaam  and 
Judas.  There  is  weakness  as  well  as  wickedness  in  men 
of  this  class,  and  withal  a  consciousness  of  weakness,  a 
tendency,  doubtless,  to  self-deception,  and  to  make  pious 
phrases  and  technically  "  good  "  works  an  atonement  and 
cloak  for  moral  faults,  yet  not  without  an  insuppressible 
sense  of  wrong  which  causes  trouble  to  a  conscience  not 
altogether  corrupted.  The  sin  and  wickedness  of  Phari- 
saism are  far  in  advance  of  this.  Its  spirit  is  opposed 
to  God,  truth,  and  goodness,  allied  to  falsehood,  selfish- 
ness, inhumanity,  pride,  and  every  evil  passion ;  yet  it 
has  a  good  conscience,  is  thoroughly  self-satisfied,  believes 
itself  to  be  on  God's  side,  and- in  possession  of  the  divine 
favour,  and  knows  nothing  of  the  weakness  of  self-distrust 
and  self-division.  The  individual  Pharisee  may  not  have 
attained  to  this  pitch  of  iniquity,  but  this  is  the  goal 
to  which  the  system  tends.  Christ's  phrase  for  the 
bad  ideal  was  hlasphemij  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
how  intensely  wicked  He  deemed  it  He  showed  when 
1  Matt.  viii.  10,  12. 


V 


THE  END.  315 


He  said :  Whosoever  sioeaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost  it 
shall  not  he  forgiven  him,  neither  in  this  world,  neither  in 
the  world  to  come}  From  this  unpardonable  sin  He  dis- 
tinguished, as  easily  pardonable,  blasphemy  against  the 
Son  of  Man,  which  is  a  sin  of  misunderstandino;,  an 
unfavourable  judgment  on  one  whose  true  character  is 
unknown,  in  the  interest  of  that  which  the  misjudged 
one  really  loves  and  is.  This  sin  is  often  committed 
by  truly  good  men  ;  who,  indeed,  has  not  been  guilty  of 
it,  and  had  occasion  afterwards  for  bitter  repentance  ? 
There  is  CA^en  a  blasphemy  against  God  which  is  of  the 
same  pardonable  character,  a  passionate  protest  against 
a  conventional  deity  not  worthy  of  trust  or  reverence, 
worshipped  by  men  whose  conduct  brings  into  discredit 
their  creed  ;  an  atheistic  reaction  against  a  base  theism  in 
the  interest  of  a  God  unknown  but  worth  knowing.  The 
Holy  Ghost  in  the  saying  of  Jesus  signifies  God  as  He  is 
in  truth,  God  in  His  very  spirit  of  righteousness,  wisdom, 
and  love,  and  the  blasphemers  of  Him  are  men  who  invest 
with  every  sacred  attribute  an  idol  of  their  own  creation, 
and  charge  with  impiety  all  who  worship  not  at  its  shrine. 

The  judgment  of  heathendom  is  pictorially  represented  . 
in  Matt.  xxv.  31-46.  The  Gentile  peoples  (ja  eOvrj) 
are  conceived  of  as  gathered  together  to  be  judged  by  the 
Son  of  Man,  and  they  are  judged  by  the  manner  in  which 
they  have  treated  Him.  The  difficulty  at  once  presents 
itself,  how  can  they  be  judged  by  their  behaviour  towards 
one  whom  they  know  not  ?  The  difficulty  is  met  by  the 
Judge  treating  what  is  done  to  His  brethren  as  done 
to  Himself.  The  question  next  arises,  who  are  the 
'  Matt.  xii.  32,  33. 


316  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

"  brethren  "  ?  Some  answer  :  disciples,  Christians.  All 
pagans  are  accounted  righteous  who  show  kindness  to 
those  bearing  Christ's  name,  giving  them  a  cup  of  cold 
water  in  the  name  of  a  disciple,  or  in  any  way  ministering 
to  their  necessities.^  The  answer  is  true  so  far  as  it 
goes,  but  it  does  not  adequately  meet  the  case.  There 
are  many  pagans  who  have  never  even  seen  a  Christian, 
not  to  speak  of  seeing  Christ.  The  "  brethren "  must 
receive  as  comprehensive  a  definition  as  is  given  to 
"  neighbour  "  in  the  parable  of  the  Good  Samaritan,  and 
be  made  coextensive  with  all  in  every  land  who  need  the 
offices  of  love.  The  brethren  of  the  Son  of  Man  in  this 
judgment  programme  are  all  the  poor,  suffering,  sorrow- 
laden  sons  of  men,  and  the  principle  on  which  judgment 
proceeds  is  that  as  men  treat  these  they  would  have 
treated  the  Judge  had  they  had  the  opportunity. 

It  is  noticeable  that  in  none  of  these  judgment 
programmes,  or  indeed  in  any  sayings  having  a  judicial 
reference,  is  mention  made  of  the  classes  whom  the 
Pharisees  shunned  and  Jesus  pitied.  The  one  word  that 
might  seem  to  wear  an  aspect  of  judicial  severity  is 
''  lost ; "  but  that  term,  as  we  have  seen,  does  not  describe 

^  So  Weizsiicker,  Untersuchmgev,  S.  199,  and  Ptleiderer,  Urchris- 
tenthum,  S.  532.  The  latter  regards  the  judgment  scene  as  a  com- 
position of  the  evangelist,  and  compliments  liim  on  the  ethical 
human  style  of  his  thought,  as  shown  in  replacing  the  lacking 
Christian  faith  in  the  case  of  the  heathen  by  Christ-like  love,  and 
so  placing  by  the  side  of  Paul's  dogmatic  universalism  his  ethically 
grounded  universalism  and  humanism.  Weiss  and  Wendt  regard 
the  passage  as  a  genuine  logion  of  Jesus,  with  exception  of  the  last 
verse,  "  These  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment,  but  the 
righteous  into  life  eternal,"  which  they  both  regard  as  a  gloss  (ride 
Das  Matthavs-EoaiKjcUum  and  Die  Lehre  Jesu). 


THE  END.  317 

a  state  of  perdition,  but  merely  of  ignorance,  error,  and 
foolishness/  It  is  a  word  of  compassion  rather  than  of 
doom.  Jesus  launched  His  stern  sentences  at  "  the 
unwedgeable  and  gnarled  oak,"  not  at -the  "lowly  myrtle." 
He  may  have  had  the  classes  above  mentioned  in  view 
when  He  said  :  "  fie  that  knew^  not,  and  did  commit  things 
worthy  of  stripes,  shall  be  beaten  with  few  stripes." " 

The  final  separation  takes  place  in  the  interest  of  an 
ideal  purity,  for  which  all  earnest  ones  constantly  strive, 
and  the  grounds  of  separation  are  such  as  commend 
themselves  to  every  unsophisticated  conscience.  In 
connection  with  the  faults  of  unfaithful  citizens  of  the 
kingdom  one  may  have  a  doubt  whether  the  characters 
in  which  they  appear  are  purely  and  irredeemably  bad ; 
but  one  cannot  doubt  that  doublemindedness,  cowardice, 
ambition,  implacability,  tyranny,  and  sloth  are  very 
evil  qualities.  With  reference  to  the  moral  perversity 
of  counterfeit  holiness,  and  the  inhumanity  of  a  Dives 
who  can  let  a  Lazarus  lie  at  his  gate  without  a  thought 
of  mitigating  his  misery,  our  assent  to  the  sentence  of 
exclusion  is  more  intense  and  unreserved.  To  every 
healthy  moral  nature  hatred  of  true  goodness,  and  piti- 
less selfishness,  must  needs  appear  altogether  damnable. 
Christ's  doctrine  approves  itself  as  of  the  highest  moral 
quality  in  fixing  on  these  as  the  unpardonable  sins. 
Nothing  can  be  conceived  more  ethically  dignified  and 
wholesome  than  that  judgment  programme  in  Matt. 
XXV.  The  judgment  of  the  pagans  proceeds  on  a  purely 
ethical  basis.  Pagans  are  not  condemned  because  they 
are  ignorant  of  Christ,  or  because  they  worship  idols,  or 
1  Vide  p.  136.  2  L^j^e  xii.  48. 


318  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

because  tliey  are  in  an  unregenerate  state  of  natural 
depravity,  or  on  any  disputable  or  indisputable  theological 
ground,  but  simply  and  solely  because  they  have  lacked 
the  love  which  in  the  view  of  the  Judge  is  the  essence 
of  goodness.  All  who  live  in  the  spirit  of  love  the  Son 
of  Man  recognises  as  Christians  unawares,  and  therefore 
as  heirs  of  the  kingdom.  All  who  live  a  loveless  life  of 
selfishness  He  relegates  to  the  congenial  society  of  the 
devil  and  his  angels. 

From  these  judgments  we  cannot  withhold  our  assent. 
Even  when  we  think  of  them  as  final,  eternal,  we  cannot 

/  help  saying,  Amen.  On  the  vexed  question  of  "  the 
eternity  "  of  future  punishments  I  do  not  mean  here  to 
enter.  It  is  a  subject  to  which  I  have  ever  felt  a  decided 
aversion,  on  which  I  have  little  light  for  myself,  and 
therefore  little  to  offer  to  others.  I  may  simply  say 
that  so  far  as  I  can  see  finality  is  involved  in  Christ's 
whole  way  of  viewing  the  consummation  of  the  kingdom. 
The  "  end,"  whensoever  it  may  come,  means  for  Him  the 
time  when  the  process  of  historical  development  is  com- 
plete, when  characters  have  become  fixed,  and  men 
are^,JS?hat-  they  will  be.  Whether  the  end  for  the 
individual  be  the  hour  of  death,  or  whether  development 
of  character  may  go  on  beyond  that  crisis,  is  a  question 
for  the  determination  of  which  few  materials  are  to  be 
found  in  the  Gospels.  The  parable  of  Dives  and  Lazarus, 
when  it  speaks  of  the  great  gulf  fixed  that  cannot  be 
passed  from  either  side,  seems  rather  discouraging  to 
those  who  cherish  "  the  larger  hope."     In  any  case,  when 

\  the  "  end "  has  come  finality  seems  a  matter  of  course. 
Some  of  Christ's  words  regarding   the  future  expressly 


THE  END.  319 

point  at  finality,  e.g.  that  regarding  the  unpardonable 
sin.  "  It  shall  not  be  forgiven,  neither  in  this  world, 
neither  in  that  to  come."  The  form  in  which  this  saying 
occurs  in  Mark,  according  to  the  best  accredited  reading, 
suggests  the  rationale  of  this  eternal  unpardonableness. 
The  blasphemer  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  there  pronounced 
guilty  of  an  "  eternal  sin  "  {alcoviov  aiiapTrjixajo^)}  He 
has  reached  the  final  stage  of  complete  moral  perversity, 
in  which  no  change  for  the  better  is  to  be  looked  for, 
and  therefore  must  remain  for  ever  excluded  from  the 
bliss  of  forgiveness  and  reconciliation  accessible  to  all  the 
penitent. 

The  significant  expression  '•'  an  eternal  sin,"  suggests 
the  thought  that  eternal  damnation  is  the  doom  only  of 
the  utterly  and  hopelessly  bad.  The  same  inference  may 
be  drawn  from  the  expression  "  prepared  for  the  devil 
and  his  angels,"  occurring  in  Matthew's  judgment  pro- 
gramme. The  words  obviously  imply  that  "the  ever- 
lasting fire  "  was  not  originally  kindled  with  reference  to 
mankind ;  that  God  created  man  for  a  better  destiny, 
and  that  if  any  man  be  consigned  to  it  for  his  misdeeds, 
it  is  an  accident  in  his  history.  But  they  imply  more,  /• 
this,  viz.,  that  no  man  will  find  his  home  in  the  everlast- 
ing fire  till  he  has  become  a  fit  companion  for  devils,  till, 
in  fact,  he  has  himself  become  diabolic.  Putting  the 
two  texts  together  the  doctrine  of  Christ  appears  to  be 
that  final,  eternal  damnation  awaits  those,  and  those 
only,  who  have  become  diabolized  through  moral  per- 
versity and  inhuman  selfishness.  To  this  doctrine  one 
can  say.  Amen,  though  with  subdued  voice.  What  does 
1  Mark  iii.  29. 


320  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

it  amount  to  but  the  expression  in  terms  of  duration  of 
the  universal  sense  of  the  absolute  badness  of  the  cha- 
racter described  ?  The  robust  conscience  habitually 
damns  such  characters  in  unqualified  terms  and  with 
passionate  earnestness.  Even  the  man  who  accepts  the 
modern  theory  of  the  universe,  according  to  which  there 
is  no  future  world,  and  the  eternal  is  immanent  in  the 
temporal,  in  his  own  way  pronounces  a  sentence  of 
eternal  damnation  on  all  that  is  diabolic  in  human  con- 
duct. And  I  suspect  that  there  are  only  two  ways  of  it : 
either  to  acquiesce  in  the  old  Jewish  mode  of  expressing 
absolute  reprobation  of  iniquity  by  attaching  to  it  a 
penalty  of  unending  future  retribution,^  or  to  find  satis- 
faction to  our  moral  resentment  in  the  conception  of  a 
moral  order  of  the  universe  acting  incessantly  throughout 
all  the  ages  as  a  gnawing  worm  consuming  rotting 
carcases,  and  as  a  glowing  fire  burning  up  the  waste 
matter  of  the  spiritual  world. 

"  Who  shall  dwell  with  the  devouring  fire  ? "  It  may 
be  hoped  few.  It  is  permissible  to  hope  that  few  will 
become  so  utterly  depraved  and  dehumanized  as  to  be 
fit  companions  for  devils.  Certain  it  is  that  Christ  had 
no  pleasure  in  contemplating  that  as  the  ultimate  state 

^  The  everlasting  fire  does  not  necessarily  imply  perpetual  exist- 
ence of  the  individual.  The  furnace  in  the  parable  of  the  Tares 
consumes  the  tares  as  waste.  From  the  point  of  view  of  that 
parable  the  wicked  are  the  waste  of  the  moral  world,  and  they  are 
cast  into  the  consuming  fire,  not  so  much  to  punish  them,  as  to  get 
rid  of  them.  How  far  the  category  of  waste  can  be  properly  applied 
to  human  souls  is  a  question  of  the  same  sort  as  that  which  asks, 
Can  a  being  endowed  with  freewill  fitly  be  compared  to  clay  in  the 
hands  of  a  potter  ?  These  analogies,  like  most  others,  can  easily  be 
carried  to  an  undue  length. 


THE  END.  321 

I 

of  any  man,  and  that  He  regarded  damnation  of  human 
beings  as  abnormal,  and  contrary  to  the  divine  order. 
This,  as  I  have  above  indicated,  is  a  fair  inference  from 
the  phrase,  "  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels." 
For  whomsoever  the  everlasting  fire  was  prepared,  it  was 
not,  in  the  view  of  Jesus,  prepared  for  man.  It  is 
important  to  note  how  studiously  He  avoids  using  any 
words  which  might  suggest  such  a  thought.  The 
sentence  put  into  the  mouth  of  the  Judge  with  reference 
to  those  on  the  left  hand  runs  thus :  "  Go  from  me, 
cursed,  into  the  everlasting  fire,  that  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels."  There  are  several  points  of 
contrast  between  this  sentence  and  that  pronounced  on 
those  on  the  right  hand.  The  article  is  wanting  before 
Karrjpafjievoi.  They  are  not  "  the  cursed  ones,"  as  the 
others  are  "  the  blessed  ones,"  but  simply  those  who  are 
in  a  cursed  moral  state,  and  therefore  must  receive  an 
appropriate  doom.  Neither  are  they  cursed  of  the 
Father,  as  those  on  the  right  hand  are  blessed  of  the 
Father.  Jesus  will  not  make  His  Father  the  source  of 
man's  cursed  condition,  but  will  rather  teach  that  men, 
by  the  abuse  of  their  freedom,  bring  that  condition  on 
themselves.  The  fire  is  not  prepared  for  these  self-cursed 
ones,  as  the  kingdom  is  prepared  for  the  righteous ;  not 
for  them,  but  for  the  spirit  of  evil  and  his  servants. 
Finally,  the  fire  is  not  pre23ared  even  for  the  devil  and 
his  angels  from  the  foundation  of  the  vjorld,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  kingdom,  but  only  when  it  is  called  for  by  their 
lapse  into  rebellion  against  the  Creator  and  Lord  of  all.^ 

1  These  points  are   noticed  by  Weiss,  vide  Das  Matthilus-Ecan- 
gelium,  S.  539. 

X 


322  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

God's  original  purpose  was  to  bless  all  His  creatures, 
angels  and  men  alike. 

How  far  Jesus  was  from  regarding  men,  all  or  any 
of  them,  as  predestined  to  damnation,  appears  from  His 
doctrine  of  election.  He  did  not  think  of  the  elect  as 
chosen  to  an  exclusive  salvation,  or  as  enjoying  a 
monopoly  of  divine  favour.  He  regarded  them  rather 
as  chosen  to  the  noble  vocation  and  function  of  saviours 
to  their  fellow -men.  "Ye  are  the  salt  of  the  earth," 
"  Ye  are  the  light  of  the  world  ; "  such  was  the  language 
He  employed  to  indicate  the  purpose  of  their  election. 
The  aim  is  universal  human  salvation,  and  the  elect  of 
any  age  are  God's  agents  in  the  execution  of  the  benefi- 
cent plan.  If  any  are  unsaved  it  is  a  miscarriage  for 
which  God  is  not  responsible,  and  which  wrings  from 
the  Eedeemer's  heart  tears  of  bitter  regret.  "  I  would,  yc 
would  not."^  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  from  some  texts  we 
might  gather  that  even  Christ  cared  only  for  the  elect, 
and  without  a  pang  left  all  the  rest  of  mankind  outside 
the  chosen  few  to  their  fate.  Thus  in  the  discourse  on 
the  last  things  we  read,  ''  He  shall  send  His  ani:rels  with 
a  great  sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  'they  shall  gather  His 
elect  from  the  four  winds,  from  one  end  of  heaven  to  the 
other."  ^  Again,  in  the  same  discourse  it  is  stated  that 
the  days  of  tribulation  preceding  the  second  advent 
sliall  be  shortened,  "  for  the  elect's  sake."  ^  I  do  not 
envy  the  man  who  can  extract  from  tliese  texts  in  an 
oljscure  apocalyptic  discourse  tlie  meaning :  what  does  it 
matter  what  happens  to  the  rest  of  mankind,  either  in 
this  world  or  in  the  next,  if  only  the  dear  elect  are  safe  ? 

1  Matt,  xxiii.  37  -  Matt.  xxiv.  31.  ^  ^yj^tt.  xxiv.  22. 


THE  END.  323 

in  defiance  of  the  general  scope  of  Christ's  teaching,  and 
the  broad  human  sympathies  that  are  the  very  essence 
of  His  gospel.  Such  men,  if  they  exist,  belong  to  an 
elect  that  has  lost  its  savour,  and  is  fit  only  to  be 
trampled  under  foot.  There  are  crises,  doubtless,  when 
all  that  can  be  done  is  to  gather  out  of  a  corrupt  mass 
that  has  become  utterly  degenerate  and  ripe  for  judg- 
ment the  few  elect  ones.  Such  was  the  case  of  Sodom 
at  the  time  of  its  overthrow.  Then  Providence  looked 
after  the  safety  of  Lot  and  his  family  before  proceeding 
to  the  work  of  destruction.  But  how  far  the  true  elect! 
are  from  thinking  that  their  safety  alone  is  of  importance 
appears  from  the  noble  intercession  of  Abraham,  who' 
prayed  that  the  few  righteous  men  in  the  city  might 
shield  the  many  from  a  too  well-deserved  doom  ;  a  prayer 
which  would  not  have  been  in  vain  had  there  been  a 
sufficient  number  of  righteous  men  in  Sodom  to  serve 
the  purpose  of  a  preservative  salt. 

Within  or  without — such  are  the  two  alternatives 
involved  in  the  judgment.  The  faithful  are  admitted 
within  the  kingdom,  the  unfaithful  and  unworthy  are 
shut  out.  The  alternatives  are  presented,  especially  in 
parabolic  narratives,  as  rewards  and  punishments.  In 
such  parables  as  The  Lahourers  in  the  Vineyard^  The 
Talents,^  and  2'he  Pounds^  we  find  a  doctrine  of  Work 
and  Wages  in  the  kingdom.  The  work  is  done  by 
the  servants  {ZovKol)  of  the  King  on  a  contract,  and  the 
wages  are  paid  at  the  end  of  the  day — that  is,  at  the 
consummation  of  all  things.  The  representation  seems 
contrary  to  the  nature  of  the  kingdom  as  a  kingdom  of 
1  Matt.  XX.  1-20.       2  Matt.  xxv.  14-30.       ^  L^^e  xix.  12-28. 


324  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

grace.  Its  adoption  is  due  in  part  to  the  parabolic  form 
in  which  our  Lord  clothed  His  thoughts  on  this  subject, 
aud  also  in  part  to  the  fact  that  it  is  in  a  certain  respect 
in  accordance  with  truth.  The  absolute  magnitude  of 
the  reward,  which  is  out  of  all  proportion  to  the  service, 
guarantees  and  guards  its  graciousness.  Eternal  life, 
admission  into  the  everlasting  kingdom,  entrance  into 
the  joy  of  the  Lord,  recovery  an  hundredfold  of  the 
things  renounced  for  the  sake  of  the  kingdom,  wdio  can 
think  of  such  blessedness  as  wages  that  have  been 
strictly  earned  ?  With  reference  to  so  great  a  recom- 
])ense  all  must  say,  "  We  are  unprofitable  servants."  It 
is  in  connection  w^ith  the  graduated  apportionment  of 
reward  in  accordance  with  the  amount  and  the  quality 
of  work  done  that  we  see  the  relative  truth  of  the  legal 
point  of  view.  For  the  rewards  and  punishments  of  the 
great  hereafter,  while  in  one  sense  all  alike,  do  also, 
according  to  the  teaching  of  Christ,  vary  on  certain 
definite  principles.  The  law  of  tlie  case,  as  gathered 
from  the  three  above  named  parables,  is  that  the  reward 
varies  according  to  the  quantity  of  work  done,  the  ability 
of  the  worker,  and  the  motive.  Ability  being  equal, 
quantity  determines  relative  value:  such  is  the  lesson 
of  the  parable  of  Tlte  Pounds ;  ability  varying,  then,  not 
the  quantity  view^ed  absolutely,  but  its  relation  to  ability 
determines  value :  such  is  the  truth  taught  in  the 
])arable  of  The  Talents.  The  supreme  importance  of 
onotive  is  the  special  contribution  of  the  parable  of  The 
Lahourers  in  the  Vi7ieyaTd.  In  the  first  of  these 
])arables  all  receive  one  pound,  but  use  it  with  unequal 
diligence,  one  making  ten  pounds,  another  only  five,  and 


THE  END.  325 

the  rewards  are  proportioned  to  the  diligence.  In  the 
second,  two  servants  make  equally  diligent  use  of  a 
different  number  of  talents,  one  getting  five  and  making- 
other  five,  the  other  getting  two  and  making  other  two  ; 
and  both  are  rewarded  alike.  In  the  third,  while  all  get 
the  "  penny,"  the  men  who  entered  the  vineyard  first  are 
paid  last,  and  those  who  entered  last  are  paid  first,  and 
much  more  than  their  legal  due :  a  day's  wages  for  an 
hour's  work ;  the  reason  of  the  diverse  treatment  lying 
in  the  diverse  dispositions  of  the  workers,  the  first 
mercenary,  the  last  devoted  and  uncalculating.^ 

Admission  into  or  exclusion  from  the  kingdom,  while 
represented  as  depending  on  the  decision  of  the  Judge, 
may  be  said  to  come  about  by  natural  law.  These  are 
admitted  within  the  kingdom,  because  the  kingdom  is 
within  them ;  those  are  excluded,  because  no  trace  of  the 
spirit  of  the  kingdom  can  be  discovered  in  them.  The 
Judge  judges  according  to  fact,  recognises  and  publicly 
proclaims  the  fact.  It  is  only  necessary  to  consider  for 
a  moment  the  grounds  of  admission  or  exclusion  to  see 
the  truth  of  this  statement.  The  loving — how  can  they 
be  shut  out  ?  They  are  in  the  kingdom,  the  spirit  of  the 
kingdom  is  in  them ;  where  they  are  the  kingdom  is. 
The  unloving — how  can  they  be  admitted  ?  They  have 
nothing  in  common  with  the  kingdom ;  where  they  are 
is  the  outer  darkness.  Christ  said,  the  ambitious  cannot 
enter  the  kingdom.  Is  the  sentence  surprising  ?  Ambi- 
tious men  often  do  much  work  ostensibly  for  the  kingdom, 
which   may  seem   to  constitute   a   claim  not   only   to   a 

1  For  a  full  dis^cussion  of  these  parables,  vide  The  Training  of  the 
Twelve,  ckap.  xvi.,  and  The  Parabolic  Teaching  of  Christ. 


326  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

place,  but  to  a  high  place  therein.  But  all  they  do 
is  done  really  for  themselves,  to  gain  popularity  and 
power.  They  are  self-seekers,  and  of  such  is  not  the 
kingdom  of  God.  So  with  all  the  other  conditions,  for 
it  is  needless  to  prove  what  to  spiritual  discernment  is 
self-evident. 

The  rewards  and  punishments  of  the  end  are  thus 
to  continue  to  be,  and  to  be  in  perfection,  what  you  have 
been.  "  He  that  is  righteous,  let  him  be  righteous  still," 
and  "  he  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still."  When 
the  great  separation  takes  place  the  righteous  shall 
simply  '*  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  their 
Pather,"  ^  be  clearly  seen  to  be  what  they  really  are, 
instead  of  having  their  character  obscured  by  mixture 
with  the  unrighteous,  and  even  being  in  danger  of  being 
confounded  with  their  moral  opposites. 

Of  these  rewards  and  punishments  the  words  of  Christ 
give  a  variety  of  figurative  representations.  The  right- 
eous sit  on  thrones,^  rule  over  cities,^  share  the  joy  of 
their  Lord,'*  a  joy  like  that  of  a  wedding  -  feast.^  The 
unrighteous  go  into  the  everlasting  fire,^  are  in  prison 
for  debt,^  receive  stripes  as  slaves  guilty  of  misconduct,^ 
pass  into  the  outer  darkness,  where  is  the  weeping  and 
gnashing  of  teeth.^  These  are  all  alike  figures,  symbols 
of  spiritual  truths,  valuable  as  such,  but  misleading  when 
taken  as  literal  descriptions  of  eternal  destinies.  The 
everlasting  fire  is,  not  less  than  the  other  figures,  only  a 

'  Matt.  xiii.  43.  -  Matt.  xix.  28. 

3  Luke  xix.  17,  18.  ^  Matt.  xxv.  21,  23. 

■'  Matt.  xxv.  1-11.  "  Matt.  xxv.  41  ;  Luke  xvi.  23. 

'  Matt,  xviii.  34.  ^  Luke  xii.  47. 

«  Matt.  viii.  12,  xxv.  30. 


THE  END.  327 

symbol,  as  appears  from  the  fact  that,  taken  literally,  it 
excludes  from  the  region  of  possibility  the  "  outer  dark-  >- 
ness."  All  these  figures  are  the  products  of  the  religious 
imagination,  and  express  in  sensuous  terms  the  intense 
conviction  of  the  enlightened  conscience  as  to  the 
blessedness  of  being  good  and  the  misery  of  being  evil. 
To  be  bad  is  to  be  as  one  dwelling  in  an  everlasting  fire ; 
to  be  negligent  of  duty  is  to  be  as  one  left  out  in  the 
cold  dark  night,  while  the  faithful  merrily  feast  in  the 
brilliantly  lighted  hall.  What  the  good  dread  is  the\ 
badness,  not  the  fire  which  is  its  symbol.  What  the 
bad  fear  is  the  fire,  not  the  evil  that  is  within  them.y 
If  one  came  from  the  dead  and  assured  them  that  the 
hell  of  which  they  had  heard  had  no  existence,  and  that 
the  only  torment  known  in  the  other  world  was  that  of 
an  evil  conscience,  it  would  comfort  them,  and  encourage 
them  to  sin  with  a  high  hand.  It  may  seem,  therefore, 
as  if  the  symbolical  character  of  Scripture  representations 
of  future  states  should  be  treated  as  an  esoteric  doctrine, 
to  be  carefully  kept  for  the  ears  of  the  initiated  and  hid 
from  the  profane  multitude.  The  policy  has  been 
pursued,  but  whether  with  much  success  for  the  real 
interests  of  the  kingdom  of  God  may  be  doubted.  Dives 
wished  one  sent  from  the  dead  to  give  a  glowing  descrip- 
tion of  the  place  of  torment  to  his  brethren,  that  they 
might  not  come  into  it.  But  our  Lord  represents 
Abraham  as  replying,  "  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  / 
prophets,  neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though  one 
rose  from  the  dead."  ^  Moses  and  the  prophets  had 
little  to  say  about  hell,  or  indeed  about  a  life  to  come 
1  Luke  xvi.  31. 


328  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

in  any  form.  The  theme  of  their  preaching  was  right- 
eousness here  and  now.  Christ  meant  to  teach  that  he 
who  has  no  ear  for  their  doctrine  cannot  be  made  a 
citizen  of  the  divine  kingdom  by  the  terrors  of  hell, 
however  vividly  depicted. 


CHAPTEE  XV. 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST. 


The  recent  revival  of  the  conception  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  which  is  so  prominent  in  Christ's  teaching  as 
reported  in  the  synoptical  Gospels,  and  which  throughout 
the  greater  part  of  the  Church's  history,  from  the 
apostolic  age  downwards,  has  been  eclipsed  by  other 
notions,  is  justly  regarded  as  a  wholesome  movement  lor 
various  reasons,  and  specially  as  supplying  a  needed 
antidote  to  religious  individualism.  This  return  to 
Christ's  way  of  regarding  salvation  as  a  social  thing  is 
but  a  single  phase  of  a  much  wider  movement  going 
on  all  around  us,  which  may  be  described  as  a  return  to 
the  Christianity  of  Christ.  On  all  sides  the  cry  is  "  back 
to  Christ."  "  To  reconceive  the  Christ  is  the  special 
task  of  our  age,"  says  one,  in  whose  mouth  it  means 
the  disentanglement  of  the  real  historical  elements  in 
the  life  of  Jesus  from  all  miraculous  accretions  assumed 
to  be  unreal  and  mythological.  It  is  possible  heartily 
to  sympathize  with  the  sentiment,  without  sharing  the 
naturalistic  bias  against  the  miraculous.  Beyond  doubt, 
to  reconceive  the  Christ  in  a  spirit  of  historic  fidelity  is 
an  urgent  task  of  vital  consequence  to  the  life  and 
prosperity  of  the  Church.     The  ecclesiastical  Christ  is  to 


6  6[)  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

a  large  extent  not  the  Christ  of  the  Gospels,  but  a  crea- 
tion of  scholastic  theology.  Notwithstanding  all  our 
preaching,  Jesus  Christ  is  not  well  known.  That  He  is 
not  well  known,  is  partly  the  fault  of  our  preaching. 
Men  are  not  permitted  to  see  Jesus  with  open  face,  but 
only  through  the  thick  veil  of  a  dogmatic  system.  The 
religious  spirit  of  Jesus,  His  attitude  towards  the  religion 
in  vogue  in  Judaa  in  His  time,  and  its  grounds.  His 
humane  sympathies,  His  thoughts  of  God,  His  ethical 
ideal,  have  been  allowed  to  fall  into  the  background. 
Hence  types  of  piety  have  sprung  up  within  the  Church 
which,  whatever  virtues  they  may  possess,  are  not 
characteristically  Christian.  It  has  become  possible  to 
be  very  religious  and  yet  to  be  very  unchristian,  not 
only  largely  ignorant  of  Christ,  but  antagonistic  to  Him 
in  spirit  ;  to  be,  in  short,  a  modern  reproduction  of  the 
Pharisee,  imagining  oneself  to  be  one  of  the  most  faithful 
friends  of  Jesus,  while  hostile  to  all  the  true  Christian 
interests  of  the  time.  This  is  apparent  to  many  without 
the  Churches,  and  constitutes  one  of  their  reasons  for 
keeping  aloof  from  them  as  institutions  having  little  real 
goodness  in  them.  It  is  also  apparent  to  an  increasing 
number  within  the  Churches,  whose  highest  aim  is  to 
know  Christ,  and  their  constant  endeavour  to  unearth 
the  Christianity  of  Christ  and  exhibit  it  to  their  fellow- 
men. 

The  growth  of  this  tendency  is  greatly  to  be  desired. 
There  is  nothing  more  likely  to  regenerate  the  Church, 
to  give  it  a  new  lease  of  life,  and  to  make  it  a  fresh 
source  of  moral  power.  Nominal  Christianity  will 
become  real  Christianity  endowed  with  something  of  its 


THE  CIiraSTIANlTY  OF  CHRIST.  $31 

pristine  energy  and  beauty.  My  hope  is  that  this  is 
what  is  before  us  :  Christianity  renewing  its  youth  by 
remounting  to  the  fountain  of  inspiration,  instead  of 
tarrying  longer  by  cisterns  in  which  the  waters  of  life 
have  become  putrid  and  unwholesome.  I  propose  to 
conclude  this  study  of  the  teaching  of  Jesus  according  to 
the  synoptical  presentation  by  indicating  some  directions 
the  new  Christian  revival  may  take,  and  some  of  the 
good  fruits  it  may  yield. 

If  the  desired  rejuvenescence  is  to  become  a  great 
fact,  tlie  restored  intuition  will  make  its  appearance 
through  a  sufficient  number  of  representative  men  in  the 
pulpit.  For  we  must  be  careful  not  to  undervalue  this 
institution  as  an  instrument  of  religious  regeneration. 
The  pulpit  is  the  place  of  the  j^'^W^^^^^  ^'^  whose  utter- 
ances men  never  have  been  and  never  will  be  indifferent ; 
to  speech,  that  is  to  say,  about  God  and  the  great  ques- 
tions of  religion  at  first  hand,  by  men  who  see  with 
their  own  eyes,  and  feel  deeply  and  truly,  and  speak  as 
they  see  and  feel ;  not  in  hackneyed  phraseology,  but  in 
their  own  natural  tongue.  The  pulpit  is  a  perennial 
institution,  an  invaluable  means  for  diffusing  among  the 
people  the  elevating  influence  of  healthy  religious  thought, 
requiring  in  order  to  its  full  usefulness  to  be  carefully 
guarded  against  enslavement,  whether  by  traditional 
creeds  or  by  current  opinion,  but  when  able  to  assert  its 
liberty  sure  to  command  general  respect  and  wield  great 
spiritual  power.  Therefore  the  desiderated  revival,  if  it 
is  to  acquire  momentum,  must  show  itself  here. 

It  will  show  itself  in  the  form  of  a  race  of  Gosiodkrs : 
men  to  whom   return    to   the    evangelic    fountains    has 


332.  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

been  a  necessity  of  their  own  spiritual  life,  possessing  the 
power  of  historical  imagination  to  place  themselves  side  by 
side  with  Jesus  as  if  they  had  belonged  to  the  circle  of 
His  personal  companions  and  disciples,  so  gaining  a  clear 
vivid  vision  of  His  spirit,  character,  and  life,  and  becom- 
ing thoroughly  imbued  with  His  enthusiasms,  His  sym- 
pathies, and  His  antipathies ;  and  with  this  experience 
behind  them,  the  fruit  of  much  thought  and  careful 
study,  coming  forth  and  saying  to  their  fellow-men  in 
effect :  "  That  which  was  from  the  beginning,  which  we 
have  heard,  which  we  have  seen  with  our  eyes  — 
declare  we  unto  you."  It  would  be  the  apostolic  age 
returned,  the  companions  of  Jesus  come  to  life  again, 
showing  the  Son  of  Man  as  He  was  in  word  and  deed 
and  way.  For  it  is  the  Son  of  Man  we  need  to  know  ; 
not  as  denying  His  divinity,  but  as  knowing  whom  we 
afhrm  to  be  divine.  What  avails  it  to  confess  that  an 
unknown  Man  is  God  ?  The  vital  matter  is  to  confess 
that  God  is  this  well-known  Man. 

The  public  would  not  be  indifferent  to  such  preaching. 
To  some  sorts  of  preaching  thoughtful  earnest  people,  not 
less  than  the  thoughtless,  listen  very  languidly,  or  with 
ill-concealed  impatience,  e.g.  to  the  platitudes  of  a  merely 
traditional  "  evangelicalism,"  and  to  the  cold  unsym- 
pathetic negations  of  an  anti-evangelic  reaction  not  far 
removed  from  pure  unmitigated  naturalism.  The  great 
public  cares  neither  for  second-hand  threadbare  dogmatism 
nor  for  barren  denial ;  it  desiderates  religious  utterances 
at  once  positive  and  fresh,  such  as  would  be  forthcoming 
from  the  gospellers  I  speak  of. 

A  general  return  to  the  Christianity  of  Christ  would 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST.  333 

have  a  most  important  effect  on  the  religious  training  of 
the  young.  At  present,  it  is  to  be  feared,  this  department 
of  the  Church's  work  suffers  greatly  from  our  being  in  a 
transition  time.  All  know  what  an  important  place  the 
Shorter  Catechism  occupied  in  the  religious  education  of 
the  youth  of  Scotland.  Whether  it  was  ever  a  good 
instrument  for  the  purpose,  is  a  question  that  need  not  be 
here  discussed.  What  is  certain  is,  that  the  most  was 
made  of  it  in  bygone  times  by  all  concerned,  parents, 
teachers,  ministers ;  whose  faithfulness  in  the  discharge 
of  duty  is  worthy  of  all  praise.  Now  this  thoroughness 
lingers  only  in  odd  corners  of  the  land.  Large  numbers 
of  people  have  become  doubtful  as  to  the  value  of  a 
dogmatic  catechism  as  an  instrument  of  religious  training, 
and  in  consequence  the  Westminster  Assembly's  Cate- 
chism has  extensively  fallen  into  desuetude.  And  as 
yet  there  is  nothing  to  take  its  place,  nothing  fitted  and 
intended  to  insure  that  the  young  shall  have  impressed 
upon  their  minds  indelibly  the  things  most  important  to 
be  known,  and  most  worthy  to  be  believed  concerning  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  the  religion  called  by  His  name. 
The  result  is  that  many  children  are  growing  up  to 
maturity  very  slightly  informed  as  to  these  things;  not 
the  children  of  the  non-church-going  alone,  but  those  of 
Church  members  not  less.  Is  this  state  of  matters  to 
continue  indefinitely  ?  Is  the  Church,  in  a  spirit  of  con- 
servatism, or  timidity,  or  listlessness,  to  say :  The  West- 
minster Catechism  or  nothing  ?  Or  is  she  to  content 
herself  with  producing  commentaries  on  the  Catechism  of  a 
purely  scholastic  type,  as  a  means  of  reviving  interest  in  it  ? 
It  seems  to  me  that  a  bolder  policy  is  called  for.     What 


334  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

is  wanted  is  not  a  dogmatic  catechism,  or  commentaries 
on  it  written  in  a  Eabbinical  spirit,  but  a  Christian  Cate- 
chism or  Primer,  framed  on  a  historical  metliod  :  a  little 
book  intended  to  do  for  the  young  of  our  time  what  Luke 
did  for  his  friend  Theophilus  ;  telling  them  the  story  of 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  in  a  way  suited  to  their  years,  and 
fitted  to  captivate  their  imaginations  and  their  hearts, 
including  the  chief  of  His  golden  sayings,  some  represen- 
tative acts  and  experiences,  and  telling  briefly  the  story 
of  His  death  and  resurrection.  Eecall  the  eight  ques- 
tions in  the  Shorter  Catechism  relating  to  Christ,  making 
mention  in  technical  terms  of  His  double  nature,  offices, 
liumiliation  and  exaltation,  and  think  what  an  abstract 
Christ  is  thus  presented  to  view  compared  with  the 
Christ  of  the  evangelists,  and  the  Christ  that  might  be 
reproduced  on  a  smaller  scale — a  photograph  as  it  were 
from  a  large  painting — in  our  new  Christian  Primer ! 

Who  is  to  prepare  the  Primer  ?  Not,  I  think,  any 
Church,  or  Assembly,  or  Assembly's  committee.  Ecclesias- 
tical bodies  are  too  conservative,  too  slow,  too  much  given 
to  drift,  too  prone  to  make  fetishes  and  Nehushtans  of 
past  means  of  grace.  The  work  must  be  done,  in  the 
first  place,  by  some  individual  Christian  man,  who  has 
seen  with  open  face  the  beauty  of  Jesus,  and  on 
whose  heart  it  lies  as  a  burden  to  show  to  others  what 
he  has  himself  seen,  and  to  whom  has  been  given  the  rare 
power  to  present  spiritual  truth  in  the  poetic,  naive, 
simple,  yet  not  shallow  way  that  wins  children.  And 
this  man  will  not  come  from  among  those  who  make  a 
saviour  of  Church,  or  creed,  or  sacrament.  Completely 
emancipated   from    ecclesiasticism,   and   dogmatism,   and 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST.  335 

sacramentarianism,  he  will  have  but  one  absorbins^  care 
and  passion — to  make  the  young  know  and  love  Jesus 
Christ.  The  advent  of  such  a  man,  with  such  a  mission, 
will  be  one  of  the  sure  signs  and  best  fruits  of  the  new 
Christian  revival ;  and  in  proportion  to  its  prevalence 
will  be  his  welcome. 

The  Christward  movement  will  make  itself  felt  in  con- 
nection with  creed  not  less  than  with  catechism.  What 
to  do  with  our  creeds  has  b8Come  for  all  the  Churches  a 
burning  question.  That  these  creeds,  centuries  old,  no 
longer  express  perfectly  or  even  approximately  the  living 
faith  of  the  Church,  is  being  frankly  acknowledged  on 
every  side.  The  free  expression  of  the  faith  and 
spiritual  life  of  former  generations,  they  have  become 
a  bondage  to  the  spirit  and  a  snare  to  the  conscience. 
Some  Churches  are  even  now  occupied  in  considering 
what  readjustments  are  necessary  to  make  the  situation 
bearable.  Various  solutions  are  proposed,  two  methods 
of  meeting  the  difficulty  finding  special  favour :  altering 
the  Confession  directly  or  indirectly  so  as  to  bring  it  into 
line  with  present  beliefs,  and  defining  anew  the  attitude 
of  the  Church  to  the  Confession. 

^STeither  of  these  operations  possesses  much  dignity, 
or  rises  much  above  the  moral  level  of  an  artifice.  The 
tinkering  method  of  altering  some  details  is  a  very  par- 
tial cure,  making  the  articles  left  untinkered  press  harder 
on  the  conscience  because  others  have  been  altered  to  suit 
present  exigencies  as  judged  of  by  majorities.  The  other 
method  of  altering  the  formula  of  subscription  amounts 
to  touching  your  hat  to  a  document  venerable  for  its 
antiquity,  and  highly  respectable  on  the  score  of  theologi- 


\y 


336  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

cal  acumen.  The  one  thing  to  be  said  for  it  is,  that  it 
gets  rid  of  the  ecclesiastical  scandal  of  making  solemn 
pretence  of  receiving  ex  animo  what  is  only  submitted  to 
reluctantly  as  a  condition  of  office. 

It  will  not  be  disputed  that  a  written  creed,  to  serve 
any  high  purpose,  ought  to  be  the  faithful  reflection  of 
the  living  earnest  faith  of  the  Church.  How  far  it  is 
possible  on  the  system  of  written  creeds  to  satisfy  this 
requirement  is  a  question  which  may  fairly  be  raised. 
Evidently  a  creed  which  is  to  continue  approximately 
true  to  the  faith  of  successive  generations  must  be 
subjected  to  periodic  revision.  In  making  this  remark  I 
have  in  view  not  so  much  the  theological  opinions  of 
individual  subscribers,  as  the  changes  which  come  over 
tlie  minds  of  whole  communities.  I  do  not  think  the 
purpose  of  a  creed  requires  it  to  be  at  any  time  in  exact 
accordance  with  the  views  of  all  the  office-bearers  of  a 
^  Church.  Individual  subscription  is  an  ecclesiastical 
device  for  securing  external  uniformity  of  opinion,  for 
which,  as  essentially  unspiritual,  I  entertain  very  little 
respect.  The  Holy  Ghost  is  the  only  true  guardian  of 
genuine  orthodoxy.  It  is  enough  if  a  creed  be  an 
honest,  straightforward  statement  of  the  faith  of  a 
Church  collectively  as  represented  by  its  supreme  court. 
But  that  it  must  be,  if  it  is  to  have  any  weight  as  a  tes- 
timony to  what  the  Church  regards  as  important  truth. 

If  the  existing  Confession  of  Eaith  cannot  claim  for 
itself  this  character,  why,  it  may  be  asked,  not  at  once 
make  a  new  one  ?  A  very  natural,  yet  somewhat  incon- 
siderate question.  Creeds  cannot  be  manufactured  to 
order,  nor   is    creed-making  the   business  of  every   age. 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST.  337 

Creed- tinkering  is  possible  at  any  time,  but  making  a 
new  creed  is  a  different  affair.  A  new  creed,  fresh  in 
conception  and  expression,  is  the  work  of  a  creative,  not 
of  a  critical  age,  and  the  outcome  of  a  new  religious  life. 
A  fresh  intuition  of  Christ  and  a  new  Christian  enthu- 
siasm such  as  I  have  been  desiderating,  would  have  for 
one  of  its  results  a  fresh  formulation  of  Christian  belief 
bearing  an  entirely  different  stamp  from  that  of  the  his- 
torical Protestant  Confessions.  Till  the  new  life  come 
we  had  better  let  the  making  of  a  new  creed  alone,  and 
be  content  with  acknowledging  in  one  way  or  another 
that  things  as  they  are  are  far  from  satisfactory.  For 
this  is  emphatically  one  of  those  matters  to  which  the 
wise  observation  of  the  late  William  Denny  applies : 
"  There  are  problems  in  the  spiritual  and  social  world 
which  are  like  some  of  our  metals,  altogether  refractory 
to  low  temperatures.  They  will  only  melt  with  great 
heat,  and  there  is  no  other  possibility  of  melting  them."  ^ 
Whence  is  the  needful  heat  to  come  ?  Not  certainly 
from  the  friction  of  theological  controversy,  which  has 
rent  the  Church  asunder  into  innumerable  fragments, 
but  from  the  central  Sun  of  the  spiritual  world,  dispelling 
with  His  beams  the  mists  of  ages,  and  shining  forth  once 
more  in  full  effulgence. 

The  reference  just  made  to  the  divided  state  of  the 
Church  leads  me  to  remark  that  ecclesiastical  reunion  or 
reconstruction  is  another  of  the  problems  to  which  Mr. 
Denny's  observation  applies.  Eeunion  is  possible  only 
through  refusion,  and  refusion  is  possible  only  through 
new  religious  intuitions  and  enthusiasms.  There  must 
^  Vide  the  Life  of  William  Denny ^  p.  338. 


338  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

come  a  change  in  the  nature  of  our  interest.     At  present 
the  supreme  interest  of  the  majority  is  in  their  Church. 
Por  them,  as  for  the  woman   of  Samaria,  the  great  ques- 
tion is — Gerizzim  or  Jerusalem,  which  of  them  is  the 
place  where  men  ought  to  worship  ?     Union  will  come 
when  men  have  learned  that  the  vital  question  is  not 
where,    but    how  ?      "  The    hour    cometh,  and    now    is, 
when  the  true  worshippers  shall  worship  the  Father  in 
spirit  and  in  truth."    The  "  hour  "  Jesus  spake  of  was  the 
Christian  era,  which  abolished  old  enmities,  antiquated 
old   institutions,  upset   partition  v/alls,  traversed    party 
lines,  and  established   a  new   society  in  which  old  dis- 
tinctions  were    ignored,  and   once   alienated   men   were 
formed  into  a  close   brotherhood.      Can   such   an   hour 
come  again  ;  or  can  a  religion,  can  even  Christianity,  have 
such  an  hour  only  once  in  its  history  ?     If,  as  both  faith 
and    philosophy    attest,    Christianity    be     the     absolute 
religion,   perennial  because    perfect,  not   destined  to   be 
superseded  by  anything  better,  because  better  is  impos- 
sible, it   must  possess  the  power  of  rejuvenescence.     It 
must  be  able  to  shake  itself  clear  of  whatever  hampers 
the  free  expression  of  its  eternal  vitality.      It  is  the  wor- 
ship of  the  Spirit,  and  the  Spirit  must  and  will  rid  itself 
of  all  bonds.     The  need  of  a  new  hour  of  emancipation 
is  a  prophecy   of  its  coming.      One  of  the  things  that 
show  the  need  is  the  divided  state  of  the  Church.     Divi- 
sion   is    an    infallible    sign    that    the    spirit    of    Christ 
immanent  in  the  Church  is  in  bondage.     If  Christ's  spirit 
were   among   us  in   power,   our   divisions    would   appear 
ridiculous  and  intolerable.     Hence  we  learn  what  is  the 
hope  of  deliverance.     It  lies  in  the  increase  of  men   to 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST.  339 

whom  Christ  and  Christianity  are  first,  and  everything 
else  secondary.  Every  man  to  whom  is  given  a  fresh 
intuition  of  Christ  will  become  an  apostle  of  union,  if  not 
in  the  sense  of  ecclesiastical  reconstruction,  which  may  or 
may  not  be  a  great  boon  according  to  circumstances,  at 
least  in  the  sense  of  a  real  spiritual  fellowship  that  will 
either  make  existing  Churches  serve  its  purpose,  or  create 
for  itself  new  media  of  self-manifestation. 

The  new  Christward  movement  must  exercise  an 
important  influence  on  the  method^ML-^ologetic.  l^o 
great  movement  of  Christian  thought  can  leave  that 
department  of  theology  untouched.  It  is  easy  to  see  in 
what  way  the  methods  of  apologetic  must  be  modified  in 
order  to  be  in  sympathy  with  the  movement  I  have 
sketched.  The  new  apologetic  will  make  it  its  first  and 
fundamental  task  to  ascertain  and  state  what  Christianity 
really  is,  and  will  rely  largely  on  the  result  of  this 
inquiry  as  its  best  armour  of  defence  against  anti- 
christian  prejudices  whencesoever  arising.  It  will  not 
begin,  as  of  old,  with  proofs  of  the  being  of  a  God,  but 
will  inquire  what  was  Christ's  idea  of  God,  and  what  its 
speculative  presuppositions,  and  show  that  these  are  more 
worthy  of  acceptation  than  any  other  thoughts  of  God, 
and  theories  of  the  universe  that  have  ever  been  pro- 
pounded. On  such  a  method  there  is  some  hope  of 
apologetic  achieving  its  purpose.  The  task  of  an  apologist 
is  desperate  if  he  is  supposed  to  be  the  advocate  of  the 
status  quo  in  theology.  It  is  otherwise  if  he  appear  as 
the  expositor  or  advocate  of  the  Christianity  of  Christ. 
In  performing  this  role  he  may  fail  to  convince  confirmed 
sceptics,  or  to  give  satisfaction  to  dogmatists  who  regard 


340  THE  KINGDOM  OF  GOD. 

an  apologist  as  a  sort  of  prize-fighter  for  all  the  details 
of  a  traditional  creed,  but  he  is  likely  to  commend  Chris- 
tianity to  men  of  open  mind  and  ingenuous  spirit,  like 
those  who  gathered  about  Jesus  by  the  banks  of  the 
Jordan,  drawn  by  a  charm  uncomprehended  but  irresist- 
ible. Christianity  will  never,  probably,  be  the  uncon- 
tradicted religion  of  all  men.  But  there  will  be  cause 
for  satisfaction  if  it  win  to  its  side  the  noble,  the  truth- 
loving,  the  men  who  have  a  passion  for  righteousness. 
I  should  not  despair  of  that  if  such  men  only  saw  Christ 
truly.  The  apologetic  of  the  future  must  make  it  its 
business  to  communicate  the  vision  to  the  few,  that  they 
in  turn  may  communicate  it  to  the  many. 

It  may  be  doubted,  indeed,  whether  a  real  knowledge 
of  the  historical  Christ  be  now  possible.  Strauss  writes : 
"  We  know  very  little  about  Jesus.  The  evangelists  have 
daubed  His  life-image  so  thick  with  supernatural  colours 
that  the  natural  colours  can  no  longer  be  restored.  The 
Jesus  of  history  is  simply  a  problem,  and  a  problem  can- 
not be  the  object  of  faith  or  the  exemplar  of  life.  It  is 
the  penalty  He  pays  for  having  been  a  God."  i  Of  course 
the  apologist  cannot  begin  by  assuming  a  doctrine  of 
inspiration  which  is  internal  to  faith,  or  postulating 
the  infallibility  of  the  evangelists.  He  must  use  the 
Gospels  as  sources  of  information  concerning  Christ  under 
the  ordinary  critical  conditions.  But  much  that  is  of 
vital  significance  can  be  ascertained  even  under  these 
conditions :  that  Jesus  habitually  spoke  of  God  as 
Father;  that  He  called  Himself  Son  of  Man,  and 
asserted  with  new  emphasis  the  worth  of  human  nature ; 
^  Der  Alte  und  tier  Neiie  Glauhe^  S.  76. 


THE  CHRISTIANITY  OF  CHRIST.  341 

that  He  preached  His  gospel  of  the  kingdom  to  the  poor ; 
that  He  was  the  friend  of  publicans  and  sinners,  and  the 
enemy  of  Pharisaism  ;  that  He  regarded  it  as  His  vocation 
to  save  the  "  lost,"  to  be  the  healer  of  moral  disease ;  that 
He  accepted  the  Messianic  idea,  and  even  regarded  Him- 
self as  the  Messiah ;  that  while  thus  associating  Himself 
closely  with  the  faith  and  hopes  of  His  countrymen  He 
taught  a  religion  which  was  in  spirit,  tendency,  and 
inevitable  result  universal ;  and  that  by  sympathies  wide 
and  deep,  but  totally  contrary  to  the  prevailing  habits  of 
thought  and  feeling  in  His  age  and  nation,  He  brought 
on  Himself  the  temporary  disgrace  and  eternal  honour  of 
crucifixion.  These  things  at  least  are  true  ;  how  much 
they  imply  ! 


INDEX 

OF  THE  MOEE  IMPORTANT  DISCOURSES,  PARABLES,  AND  INCIDENTS 
IN  CONNECTION  WITH  WHICH  SAYINGS  WERE  SPOKEN,  WITH 
THE  RELATIVE  GOSPEL  TEXTS,  AND  REFERENCES  TO  PAGES 
IN  THIS  WORK. 


SUBJECT. 

GOSPEL  TEXTS. 

PAGE. 

I.  Discourses. 

The      Sermon     on     the 

Matt,   v.-vii.  ;    Luke   vi. 

5-8, 10, 11,  12,  22,  28,  63, 

Mount, 

20-49, 

68,  88,  111,  187,  189, 
204,  211,  212,  214,  217, 
227,  233,  249,  268,  312. 

Discourse  on  the  mission 

Matt.  X. ;  Mark  vi.  7-13 ; 

117,  138,  284,  285,  312. 

of  the  Twelve, 

Luke  ix.  1-6, 

Discourse  on  Blasphemy, 

Matt.  xii.  22-37;    Mark 
iii.    21-30;    Luke    xi. 
14-26, 

17,  172,  259,  314,  319. 

„           Humility, 

Matt,   xviii.  ;    Mark    ix. 
33-50  ;  Luke  ix.  46-50, 

19,  90,  269,  287,  313. 

,,           Pharisaism, 

Matt,  xxiii.,     . 

22,  189,  191,  193,  194, 
195-205,  233,  269. 

,,           Last  Things, 

Matt.  xxiv. ;  Mark  xiii. ; 

185.    280,    285,  288-292, 

Luke  xxi.. 

322. 

II.  Parables. 

The  Sower,      . 

Matt.  xiii.  3-9  ;  Mark  iv. 
3-9  ;  Luke  viii.  5-8, 

275,  294-296. 

The  Tares, 

Matt.  xiii.  24-30,     . 

275,  296,  297,  311. 

Mustard  Seed, 

Matt.  xiii.  31,  32 ;  Mark 
iv.    30-32;    Luke  xiii. 
18,  19, 

275,  294. 

The  Leaven,    . 

Matt.  xiii.  33 ;  Luke  xiii. 
20,  21, 

256,  283,  294. 

The    Treasure    and    the 

Matt.  xiii.  44-46,     . 

222. 

Pearl, 

The  Drag  Net. 

Matt.  xiii.  47-50,     . 

296. 

The  Seed  growing  gradu- 
ally, 
The  Two  Debtors,    . 

Mark  iv.  26-29, 

124,  275. 

Luke  vii.  36-50,       . 

143. 

The  Good  Samaritan,      . 

Luke  X.  38-42, 

38,  212,  316. 

342 


INDEX. 


343 


SURJECT. 

GOSPEL  TEXTS. 

PAGE. 

II.  Parables— con^c?. 

The    Selfish    Neighbour, 

Luke  Ki.  5-8,  xviii.  1-8,  . 

120,  277. 

and  the  Unjust  Judge, 

The    Unfaithful    Upper 

Luke  xii.  42-46,       . 

278,  313,  326. 

Servant, 

The  Barren  Fig  Tree,      . 

Luke  xiii.  6-12, 

302. 

The  Great  Supper,  . 

Luke  xiv.  16-24,      . 

300. 

The  Finding  of  the  Lost, 

Luke  XV., 

112,  133,  136,  190. 

Dives  and  Lazarus,  . 

Luke  Kvi.  19-31,      . 

141,  317,  318,  327. 

Extra  Service, 

Luke  xvii.  7-10, 

225. 

Pharisee  and  Publican,    . 

Luke  xviii.  9-14,      . 

190,  201. 

Children  in   the  Market 

Matt.  xi.  16-19, 

299. 

Place, 

The  Unmerciful  Servant, 

Matt,  xviii.  21-35,  . 

269,  313,  326. 

The    Labourers    in    the 

Matt.  xxi.  1-16,       . 

226,  269,  323,  324. 

Vineyard, 

The  Two  Sons, 

Matt.  xxi.  28-32,     . 

302. 

The  Wicked  Vinedressers, 

Matt.  xxi.  33-41;   Mark 
xii.  1-12 :  Luke  xx.  9- 
16, 

179.  303. 

The  Royal  Wedding, 

Matt.  xxii.  1-14,      . 

303. 

•^     The  Ten  Virgins,     . 

Matt.  XXV.  1-13,      . 

278,  326. 

•^      The  Talents,    . 

Matt.  XXV.  14-30,    . 

313,  323,  324,  326. 

The  Pounds,    . 

Luke  xix.  12-28,      . 

323,  324,  326. 

III.  Incidents. 

The  Temptation,     . 

Matt.  iv.  1-11 ;  Luke  iv. 
1-13, 

32,  162. 

Scene  in  Nazareth  Syna- 

Luke iv.  16-30, 

25,  33,  50,  160. 

gogue, 
Healing  of  the  Paralytic  : 

Matt.  ix.  6;  Mark  ii.  10; 

173. 

Power  to  forgive  sin. 

Luke  V.  24, 

Call    of    Matthew:     ''I 

Matt  ix.  13 ;  Luke  v.  32, 

8,  9,  53,  96,  190. 

came  not  to  call    the 

righteous," 

Neglect  of  Fasting, . 

Matt.  ix.  14-17  ;  Mark  ii. 

45,  51,  52,  217,  230,  232, 

18  22  ;  Luke  V.  33-39, 

233, 

Rubbing    ears    of    corn : 

Matt.    xii.    8 ;    Mark  iii. 

77,  173,  197. 

Lord  of  the  Sabbath, 

28  ;  Luke  vi.  5, 

The    Sabbath    made    for 

Mark  ii.  27,      . 

74. 

man, 

Roman  Centurion,  . 

Matt.    viii.   5-13;    Luke 
vii.  1-10, 

30,  100,  313. 

John  the  Baptist's  mes- 

Matt. xi.  1-19 ;  Luke  vii. 

51,  80,  153,  161,  188. 

sage     to     Christ     and 

19-30, 

Christ's     estimate     of 

him, 

John's  preaching  of    re- 

Luke iii.  10-14, 

86,  95. 

pentance. 

The  woman  that   was  a 

Luke  vii.  36-50,       . 

97,  143. 

sinner, 

The  mission  of  the  seventy, 

Lukex.  1-16,  . 

27. 

The  gracious  invitation,' . 

Matt.  xi.  27-30, 

24,  35-38,  195,  202,  204, 

218. 

344 


INDEX. 


III.  Incidents— con^rf. 

Martha  and  Mary,  . 
The  Lesson  on  Prayer,     . 
The  Lord's  Prayer, . 

*'  The  harvest  is  great,"  . 
The  filial  consciousness  of 

Jesus, 
Jesus    the    Revealer    of 

God, 
*'  Behold  my  servant,"    . 
Neglect  of  washing, 

Syro-Phcenician  "Woman, 

At     Caesarea     Philippi  : 
Peter's  Confession, 

The     Founding    of     the 

Church, 
First  lesson  on  the  doc- 

rine  of  the  Cross, 

The  Three  Aspirants, 
The  Transfiguration, 


The  Temple  Tax,     . 
"  Forbid  him  not,'* . 

Question  of  Divorce, 

Young  man  seeking  eter- 
nal life. 

Two  Sons  of  Zebedee  : 
Second  lesson  on  doc- 
trine of  Cross, 

Zacchaeus, 
J,       The      Judgment      Pro  - 
gramme. 

Anointing  in  Bethany  : 
Third  lesson  on  doc- 
trine of  Grots, 

The  Lord's  Supper  : 
Fourth  lesson  on  doc- 
trine of  Cross, 

"Destroy  this  temple,"  . 

Baptism :  Trinitarian  for- 
mula, 


GOSPEL  TEXTS. 


Luke  X.  38-42, 
Luke  xi.  1-13, 
Matt.  vi.  9-15;  Luke  xi. 

1-4, 
Matt.  ix.  37,    . 
Matt.  xi.  25-27  ;  Luke  x. 

20-22, 
Matt.  xi.  27,    . 

Matt.  xii.  18-21,      . 
Matt.  XV.  1-20 ;  Mark  vii. 

1-23, 
Matt.    XV.    21-28;    Mark 

vii.  24-30. 
Matt.  xvi.   13-20;   Mark 

viii.   27-30;    Luke   ix. 

18-21, 
Matt.  xvi.  18-21,     . 

Matt.  xvi.  21-28;  Mark 

viii.    31-33 ;    Luke   ix. 

22  27 
Luke  ix!  60-62, 
Matt.   xvii.   1-13;    Mark 

ix.  2-13;  Luke  ix.  28- 

36. 
Matt.  xvii.  24-27,    . 
Mark  ix.  38-40 ;  Luke  ix. 

50, 
Matt.  xix.  1-12  ;  Mark  x. 

2-12, 
Matt.  xix.   16-22;  Mark 

X.    17-27;  Luke  xviii. 

27,  28, 
Matt.    XX.    20-28;    Mark 

X.  35-45, 

Luke  xix.  1-10, 
Matt.  XXV.  31-46,    . 

Matt.  xxvi.  6-13;  Mark 
xiv.  3-9, 

Matt.  xxvi.  26-29 ;  Mark 
xiv.  22-25 ;  Luke  xxii. 
19,  20, 

Matt.  xxvi.  61 ;  Mark 
xiv.  58, 

Matt,  xxviii.  19, 


35. 

17,  141. 
115. 

135.  140. 
180-184,  203,  301. 

109,  156,  185. 

150. 

29,  69,  184,  199.  208. 

8,  28,  30,  100,  103. 

16,  21,  24,  163,  167,  177, 
178,  260,  265,  267. 

254-272. 

230,  286. 


222. 
162-164. 


239,  269. 
139,  269. 

71. 

78,  223. 

154,  220,  235. 

1.37. 

155,  175,  266,  315,  321. 

243,  280. 
246. 

306-310. 

258. 


^^, 


